Re: [Dri-devel] dri-cvs & miniglx merge
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:48:16AM +0100, Keith Whitwell wrote: > Otto Solares wrote: > >Hi! > > > >I am trying to merge the r200 driver from dri-cvs to mesa-miniglx, > >finally i had most files merged but i am finding heavy X dependencies > >in header files in dri-cvs (eg radeon.h), it was not supposed dri > >drivers should be backend agnostic? > > > >Is somebody working on resolving this situation? i think unified > >dri drivers should be a common goal. > > A number of people, including myself, are interested in seeing this happen. > Unfortunately, there's also a heap of other things taking up our time. My > current project is a tnl rewrite that actually predates this work on moving > the DRI drivers over to mesa. I really want to get that sorted out first. Good! if you need help because time contraints just say a word, even you could tell me what to do and verify if am doing right, i am very interested in this goal. -solca --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects. See the people who have HELPED US provide better services: Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [Dri-devel] dri-cvs & miniglx merge
it's be nice if we could merge radeon and r200 into one driver when we did this as well. Alex --- Alan Hourihane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:53:29AM -0600, Otto Solares wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I am trying to merge the r200 driver from dri-cvs to mesa-miniglx, > > finally i had most files merged but i am finding heavy X > dependencies > > in header files in dri-cvs (eg radeon.h), it was not supposed dri > > drivers should be backend agnostic? > > > > Is somebody working on resolving this situation? i think unified > > dri drivers should be a common goal. > > > > And yes!, dri drivers should live in mesa tree instead of Xfree > IMHO. > > Indeed. I'm working on this at the moment. But being able to do this > with a degree of cross code sharing is tricky. MiniGLX uses a subset > of the current DDX driver mechanism's to initialize the DRI. It would > be nice if that code can be shared. Before that can happen though, is > that we need dynamic back/depth buffer creation - which is what I'm > currently working on. > > In fact, I'll probably be creating a branch in the DRI CVS pretty > soon. > I've used the r200 driver as a basis for this work. > > Alan. > > > --- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > ___ > Dri-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [Dri-devel] dri-cvs & miniglx merge
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:53:29AM -0600, Otto Solares wrote: > Hi! > > I am trying to merge the r200 driver from dri-cvs to mesa-miniglx, > finally i had most files merged but i am finding heavy X dependencies > in header files in dri-cvs (eg radeon.h), it was not supposed dri > drivers should be backend agnostic? > > Is somebody working on resolving this situation? i think unified > dri drivers should be a common goal. > > And yes!, dri drivers should live in mesa tree instead of Xfree IMHO. Indeed. I'm working on this at the moment. But being able to do this with a degree of cross code sharing is tricky. MiniGLX uses a subset of the current DDX driver mechanism's to initialize the DRI. It would be nice if that code can be shared. Before that can happen though, is that we need dynamic back/depth buffer creation - which is what I'm currently working on. In fact, I'll probably be creating a branch in the DRI CVS pretty soon. I've used the r200 driver as a basis for this work. Alan. --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [Dri-devel] dri-cvs & miniglx merge
Otto Solares wrote: Hi! I am trying to merge the r200 driver from dri-cvs to mesa-miniglx, finally i had most files merged but i am finding heavy X dependencies in header files in dri-cvs (eg radeon.h), it was not supposed dri drivers should be backend agnostic? Is somebody working on resolving this situation? i think unified dri drivers should be a common goal. A number of people, including myself, are interested in seeing this happen. Unfortunately, there's also a heap of other things taking up our time. My current project is a tnl rewrite that actually predates this work on moving the DRI drivers over to mesa. I really want to get that sorted out first. Keith --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
[Dri-devel] dri-cvs & miniglx merge
Hi! I am trying to merge the r200 driver from dri-cvs to mesa-miniglx, finally i had most files merged but i am finding heavy X dependencies in header files in dri-cvs (eg radeon.h), it was not supposed dri drivers should be backend agnostic? Is somebody working on resolving this situation? i think unified dri drivers should be a common goal. And yes!, dri drivers should live in mesa tree instead of Xfree IMHO. -solca --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
