Daryll Strauss wrote:
>
> Huh? You misunderstood what I wrote. I guess it wasn't clear.
>
> Glide as a stand alone 3D interface is dead. People shouldn't be writing
> applications to Glide they should be using OpenGL. Glide as a hardware
> abstraction layer is fine.
>
> So, all I was saying is
On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 01:16:59AM +1000, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> I wrote:
> > The DRI glide is ONLY useful for the DRI. It won't function in stand
> > alone mode at all. In other words, there isn't just V3 and V5 versions,
> > but also V3-non-DRI, V3-DRI, V5-DRI versions. But, Glide is dead and I
Daryll Strauss wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 03:12:46AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2001, Daryll Strauss wrote:
> >
> > >It depends on what part of the process you want to solve.
> > >
> > >For the DRI, the easiest solution would be to have the dri_tdfx.o
> > >dynamically
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 03:12:46AM -0400, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Fri, 4 May 2001, Daryll Strauss wrote:
>
> >It depends on what part of the process you want to solve.
> >
> >For the DRI, the easiest solution would be to have the dri_tdfx.o
> >dynamically load the appropriate Glide. The X serv
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 03:50:29AM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> Can anyone think of a reason why APIC may or may not affect stability of
> DRI on some/any AGP cards? APIC is a SMPism, but several new boards offer
> it even for uniprocessor systems and I've always used it when available.
It works
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 11:36:23PM -0700, Joseph Carter wrote:
> If I had to guess, ACPI. Turn it off. Since you have had luck with the
> Radeon, which motherboard are you using?
o VIA VT82C686b & VT8363/VT8365 ...
Even if I turned off acpi I still got random lock ups. :(
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday May 6, 2001 08:07 am, Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:05:01PM +1000, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> > > Can anyone think of a reason why APIC may or may not affect
> > > stability of DRI on some/any AGP cards? APIC is a SMPism, bu
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 10:05:01PM +1000, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> > Can anyone think of a reason why APIC may or may not affect stability of
> > DRI on some/any AGP cards? APIC is a SMPism, but several new boards offer
> > it even for uniprocessor systems and I've always used it when available.
>
Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> The Radeon 64 works fine in windoze in my brother's box (VIA chipset,
> Intel chip, Celeron 600ish I think) and I'm going to try it in a BX-based
> Linux box to confirm that the Radeon 64 driver works. I suspect it will,
> but in that case the problem is most likely agpg
Joseph Carter wrote:
>
> Can anyone think of a reason why APIC may or may not affect stability of
> DRI on some/any AGP cards? APIC is a SMPism, but several new boards offer
> it even for uniprocessor systems and I've always used it when available.
>
> I'm wondering if this could possibly have
Can anyone think of a reason why APIC may or may not affect stability of
DRI on some/any AGP cards? APIC is a SMPism, but several new boards offer
it even for uniprocessor systems and I've always used it when available.
I'm wondering if this could possibly have anything to do with my Radeon
and
11 matches
Mail list logo
