On Sat, 2001-09-15 at 00:25, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> > > > ReiserFS may be another problem.
> > > Can't wait for that.
> Most wanted, now.
I am working on it, but I am unfamilar with it all.
Are you seeing any specific problems, now? With the latest preemption
patch on 2.4.10-pre9, do you crash
Brian Paul wrote:
>
> Here's the deal. The DRI developers, including myself, have been laid-off
> from VA Linux. Today (Friday) is my last day.
That's sad. But how the world goes.
Daryll, what are you doing, next?
> There's an effort to relocate us to a new organization but it's too early
> t
Am Freitag, 14. September 2001 06:35 schrieb Robert Love:
> On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 22:47, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> > > -- ReiserFS may be another problem.
> >
> > Can't wait for that.
Most wanted, now.
> >
> > > third, you may be experiencing problems with a kernel optimized for
> > > Athlon. thi
On Friday 14 September 2001 21:08, you wrote:
> That's fine -- I wasn't suggesting that. But, for the people who can
> actually do this job, the r128/G400 isn't terribly interesting anymore.
> Isn't the whole open source thing about developers scratching an itch?
Cool. It just came across diff
Frank Earl wrote:
>
> How about all those people without the luxury of upgrading- say laptops
> and things like iMacs? Go buy a whole new computer- not an option, when
> you think about it. This is not to say you have to be doing it- but
> someone ought to be doing something about it. I'm n
Frank Earl wrote:
>
> > Some are saying that Linux on the desktop is already dead...
>
> Really? Somehow, I find that hard to believe with places like Largo, FL
> using it on the desktop- I'm of the belief that it's still in its infancy.
Again, I don't actually agree with the statement. Howev
On Friday 14 September 2001 18:22, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Indeed, this is a problem... Mind you, in the days of the GeForce3 (and it
> successors) and Radeon 8500 (or whatever they're calling the R200), who
> wants to be stuck maintaining a driver for the r128? Not me...
How about all those pe
>I agree, however, it depends on your definition of "dead" and what your
>goals for Linux on the desktop are. A niche market of technically-literate
>users is a very different thing to widespread acceptance in the corporate
>and home arenas.
One important point here is the embedded market. Th
On Friday 14 Sep 2001 9:25 pm, you wrote:
> Is open source absolutely essential? Personally, I would rather have
> binary-only drivers written by the likes of Brian, Gareth, Keith, et.
> al. than binary-only drivers written by some faceless unknown.
Binary only drivers, ups and downs.
Ups:
Th
On Friday 14 September 2001 17:06, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Some are saying that Linux on the desktop is already dead...
Really? Somehow, I find that hard to believe with places like Largo, FL
using it on the desktop- I'm of the belief that it's still in its infancy.
Oh, congrats on scoring you
Jeffrey W. Baker wrote:
>
> I think you should point this out when you claim that ATI and Matrox's
> products are obsolete.
I've been saying that for a *long* time -- perhaps you missed it, or perhaps
the conversations took place elsewhere. Either way, my opinion hasn't
changed since joinin
On Friday 14 Sep 2001 11:22 pm, you wrote:
> Indeed, this is a problem... Mind you, in the days of the GeForce3 (and it
> successors) and Radeon 8500 (or whatever they're calling the R200), who
> wants to be stuck maintaining a driver for the r128? Not me...
It's like any other open source pro
On Friday 14 Sep 2001 6:58 pm, you wrote:
> I think people need to take a step back and have a think about how much
> money it costs to support top-class developers like those work/have worked
> on the DRI. We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Unless
Definitely. I can't see t
On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Gareth Hughes wrote:
> Since I now work for NVIDIA, you can put their closed-source driver in this
> basket (not to say the GL group here isn't totally amazing already).
I think you should point this out when you claim that ATI and Matrox's
products are obsolete.
> > 3D is
>Indeed, this is a problem... Mind you, in the days of the GeForce3 (and it
>successors) and Radeon 8500 (or whatever they're calling the R200), who
>wants to be stuck maintaining a driver for the r128? Not me...
Yeah, I can understand... well, if you have clues about things I
could look at,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> Another point is that binary drivers like NVIDIA are x86 only, which is
> a problem for me (PPC) as Apple now bundles their cards with recent
> Mac G4s.
>
> Also, despite beeing pretty complete, the r128 driver is experiencing
> all sorts of lockups (depending o
>
>> It would be extremely unfortunate if we have to rely upon in-house
>> developers writing binary-only drivers for Linux. With a company like
>> NVIDIA, it really isn't that big of a deal, as they have excellent
>> drivers under both Windows and Linux. But ATI and Matrox both have poor
>> Wind
I'd be willing to donate to support DRI development.
I'd even be willing to donate a substantial amount
assuming it would guarantee some results. Maybe a
project like this would catch the eye of the HW
vendors and prompt them to put more effort into
opensource drivers.
Alex
-
Dear
Mark Allan wrote:
>
> So do we give up on open source drivers completely? I'm willing to bet
> that there is some way to generate sufficient revenue to fund the DRI. I
> don't know what it is, but it would be worth throwing some ideas around
> rather than throwing our hands up and saying "oh, we
Gareth Hughes wrote:
> I think people need to take a step back and have a think about how much
> money it costs to support top-class developers like those work/have worked
> on the DRI. We're talking hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Unless
> the IHVs (or other companies) want to support
Andrew James Richardson wrote:
>
> I'm sure that everybody has their say on this but would you think of a
> company set up so that people donated money in exchange of binary drivers
> (source was free of course) for DRI, more like ordered donation than
> business really. I for one would be
Dear Brian/Keith etc.
I'm sure that everybody has their say on this but would you think of a
company set up so that people donated money in exchange of binary drivers
(source was free of course) for DRI, more like ordered donation than business
really. I for one would be keen to donate $20
Dieter Nützel wrote:
>
> Anybody (Brian, Keith?) working on the Mesa-3.5-tree?
> I've didn't see any activity for some days/weeks, now.
Here's the deal. The DRI developers, including myself, have been laid-off
from VA Linux. Today (Friday) is my last day.
There's an effort to relocate us to a
9/14/2001 8:31:46 AM, Nick Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
gah,
Sorry ignore this I sent the wrong email out . sorry if anyone is bothered :O)
Nick
>Greetings,
>
> I know this may sound Newbie so im sorry I tired to compile DRI on RH 7.1
>and it compiles for around 2
>hours
Greetings,
I know this may sound Newbie so im sorry I tired to compile DRI on RH 7.1
and it compiles for around 2
hours the at the very end it says it done and the hangs I have to press ctrl+c to kill
the process. I go back to look at
the log file and no errors are made during t
On Fri, Sep 14, 2001 at 10:08:01AM +0200, Gerd Knorr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've figured why the Rage 128 crashes if the bttv overlay is active (see
>
>http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=210239&group_id=387&atid=100387).
>
> Because the r128 driver does 2D acceleration using
Hi,
I've figured why the Rage 128 crashes if the bttv overlay is active (see
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=210239&group_id=387&atid=100387).
Because the r128 driver does 2D acceleration using MMIO commands, it has
to shutdown the CCE every time it wants to submit a
27 matches
Mail list logo
