On 12-Mar-01 Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> That's what I thought, but Jordan's email really made me doubt that my
> vision of things is correct. Particulary, I don't quite understand this
> one:
>
> Statement #1: Utah-GLX doesn't direct render
>
> Statement #2: From man nv(4) of XFree-4.0.2- "The driver is fully
> accelerated, and provides support..."
This means 'in 2D'.
> So, considering all the above, I don't quite understand "at least 2X the
> frame rate using the same OpenGL app", speaking Jordan's words.
>
> I'm probably missing something here, and I'm very eager to find my way
> out :-)
Yes, see above :)
> Actually, there's one more question I have about XFree-4. IIUC, core GL
> libs, such as libGL.so, libOSMesa.so, etc are included in XFree 4.0.2 core
> distribution. So how come that lots of applications still have Mesa-3.2
> in their dependencies?
No idea :)
---
Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer
for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au
"The nice thing about standards is that there
are so many of them to choose from."
-- Andrew Tanenbaum
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
