Around 12 o'clock on May 27, Ian Romanick wrote:
I'm pretty sure that XFree86 and Xorg will continue to want to build 3D drivers as part of their distribution process. Even so, there are parts of Mesa that are needed to build libGL.so and libglx.a.
With stable interfaces and published Mesa releases, there's no good reason to incorporate the Mesa code into the X release. Certainly the X build could depend on a specific Mesa release (or range of releases) if necessary, but that's already common practice for many other systems.
Having X split into pieces so that Mesa could depend on those without having to have the X server also pre-built seems necessary as well though.
We can cut the Mesa tree imported into X down a lot, but it will always need some stuff to build libGL.so and libglx.a. It will need, at the very least, all the API dispatch code and the code for operating on __GLcontextModes (which are used internally to represent GLXVisualConfigs and GLXFBConfigs).
After looking at the "fake" GLX stuff and the mini GLX stuff, we might want to pull even more of the generic GLX stuff (i.e., not the parts that implement the wire protocol) into Mesa. I see no point in having 3 different-but-similar implementations of glXChooseVisual or glXChooseFBConfig, for example. That's quite a few more steps down the way, though.
Refactoring is fun. :)
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
