On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 01:38:06PM -0500, Forge wrote:
> Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on dri-devel?
> Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by non-subscribers
> for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the non-subscribed emails, so
> that everyone else c
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:53:20PM +, John Gay wrote:
> I posted this on the XFree86 list, but was refered here instead.
>
> I'm getting ready to rebuild my system from scratch and am pondering which
> card to put into it.
>
> 1) a 3DLabs GVX1 AGP card. This works fine in 2D but the 3D suppo
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 06:11:09PM -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> Gregor Riepl wrote:
> > For all those who don't know yet:
> > ATI has released a closed source driver which should support most ATI based
> > video cards. You can grab it on www.ati.com. (It's an rpm though)
> >
> > This is quite nice,
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 08:13:05PM -0600, Jeff Hartmann wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ian Romanick
> > Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 7:12 PM
> > To: DRI developer's list
> > Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] The next round
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 12:09:58PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> > struct memory_block {
> > u32 age_variable;
> > u32 status;
> > };
> >
> > Where the age variable is device dependant, but I would imagine in most
> > cases is a monotonically increasing unsigned 32-bit number
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 11:26:02AM -0800, Allen Akin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 11:42:31PM -0800, magenta wrote:
> | I'd personally take the school of thought that if the user is running a
> | game which takes up 60MB of texture memory and then tries to concurrently
> |
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 11:03:21PM -0800, Allen Akin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 10:16:30PM -0800, magenta wrote:
> |
> | Should it even be possible for one process to swap out other processes'
> | context data?
>
> In the same way that one process can cause the o
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 05:33:42PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> 1. In a scheme like this, how could processes be forced to update the
> can-swap bits on blocks that they own?
Should it even be possible for one process to swap out other processes'
context data? Alternatively (forgive me if t
On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 04:25:47PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
> >
> > Oh, my bad. Too many people to keep track of. :) It seems that Keith has
> > already extended the isosurf demo to trigger the failure condition, though,
> > so hopefully I can stop pretending to be someone who has any ide
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 03:23:13PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:48:51PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> [...]
> >> >> It was like the image that was supposed to be clipped because it was
> >> >> hidden became visible briefly as the light went by. It just happens
> >> >>
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 10:36:10AM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
>
> >
> > Then there's a problem with glArrayElement() in the R200 driver while
> > recording a displaylist.
> >
> > The specific piece of code that it's running is this (while a displaylist
> > is being recorded in GL_COMPILE_AND_E
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:00:10PM -0700, Jens Owen wrote:
> Michel Daenzer wrote:
> > This doesn't help mixed OpenGL and X11 rendering in the same
> > window, but that supposedly doesn't work with the traditional method of
> > drawing to the back buffer and then copying it over the front buf
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:48:51PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> >> Yes, that would be the one. If you take all the torus together it reminds
> >> me of a cartoonish framework for what could be overall a sphere. Imagine
> >> stretching a piece of cloth around the whole grouping ...
> >>
> >> >
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:40:09PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> > And I can guarantee it's not a bug in Solace. ;)
>
> >> http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/Radeon/Solace-4.x.png
> >>
> >>
> >> Maybe this program is not that complex and could server as a test case for
> >> DRI/Mesa-4.x,
On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 11:43:59PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 08:06:58PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I know that my engine Solace (http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/Solace/)
> >
On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 08:06:58PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> >
> > I know that my engine Solace (http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/Solace/)
> > causes such artifacts... my guess is that it happens when playing back a
> > displaylist which was created using glArrayElement(). (I'm guessing that
> >
On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 12:07:40PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Mark wrote:
> > So i've been sitting on the sidelines waiting for a fix for the rendering bugs
> > in the R200 driver, but it doesn't seem like anyone is tackling it. I'm
> > running a Radeon Mobility 9000. RTCW is playable but wit
On Wed, Dec 25, 2002 at 01:42:57AM +, Chris Howells wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After a bit of messing about, I managed to get DRI working on my Mobile Radeon
> 7500 (XFree86 4.2.1 from a fairly recent Debian sarge snapshot, custom 2.4.20
> kernel).
>
> Unfortunately, the performance isn't wonderful.
On Tue, Dec 24, 2002 at 03:47:01PM -0800, David Bronaugh wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:40:14 -0800 (PST) hyper bit
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello, you say that you doesn't get the Nvidia sourcecode, then look to
> > nvidia.com under download. this is a sourcecode. why do you can't
> >
On Sat, Dec 21, 2002 at 08:20:59AM -0500, Adam K Kirchhoff wrote:
>
> Hey folks,
>
> Wasn't sure if you guys were aware of this, but there's a new
> patch out for ut2k that removes the requirement for an OpenGL driver which
> supports S3TC.
>
> I applied the patch and attempted to
On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 12:47:34PM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> >> There are sporadic rendering bugs in FlightGear, however. Every ~40
> >> frames or so, I'll see a large triangle or two flash on the screen.
>
> > Like these ones ?
>
> > http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/Radeon/Mesa-4.0
On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 03:29:35PM +0100, Dieter Nützel wrote:
> Am Freitag, 20. Dezember 2002 14:38 schrieb Alexander Stohr:
>
> [-]
>
> > And thats why all the world on the stock marked emphasizes on their
> > patents protfolio, its money and power that those patenst sometimes
> > do represent.
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 12:43:48PM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> > But they're not transferring the license to others, they're just
> > providing a reference implementation. nVidia themselves wouldn't be
> > sued for it, but someo
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:32:02AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> > > And there is no one involved with DRI with assets to
> > > pay such an award anyway.
> >
> > Except all the distros
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> > You don't understand how patents work, do you? All of those people
> > (except OpenIL, anyway) have licensed the algorithm itself. The
> > algorithm is freely-available (it's even pa
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 08:10:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> You have to balance things out. Yes, the US is litiginous, and clearly way
> too much so. Is the answer to just cower in a hole and hope it passes?
> Maybe. And maybe not.
Maybe the proper course of action would be to try to come
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 10:14:16PM -0500, Geoffrey Antos wrote:
> I believe that it is safe to go ahead and implement S3TC texture
> decompression code in DRI.
>
>
>
> Thus, there are many indications that S3TC can be used for Open Source
> projects without fear.
You don't understand how patent
On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 12:14:53AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 21:58, magenta wrote:
>
> > http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~joshagam/Solace/
>
> Looks very interesting, is there a chance for a Linux/PPC build?
If someone were to lend me a Linux/PPC machine to
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 01:04:18PM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > Andy Ross wrote:
> > > Is it possible [...] to get the client-side libGL to look somethere
> > > *other* that /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri for drivers?
> >
> > It's LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH
>
> Perfect. Thanks.
>
> >
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 12:10:03PM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
>
> ATI blows you guys away in glxgears. I see 38% faster frame rates
> with their drivers. Since I doubt gears is doing anything but
> glVertex calls (someone correct me if I'm wrong), I take this to mean
> that there's significant room
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 09:26:49AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 04:40:00PM -0800, magenta wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:56:09PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> > >
> > > It is one way. It's the way that the OpenGL ARB has sanctified wi
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 07:25:08PM -0800, Allen Akin wrote:
>
> But to make this constructive, I think the best thing we can do is to
> generate a list of the state that people want to tweak. There's a lot
> of low-level state, so it could be a *very* long list. Once it exists,
> we'll have a be
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:38:41PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Allen Akin wrote:
> >
> > Putting it in "kernel guy" terms, it's like sideband mechanisms for
> > talking to device-dependent code in the kernel that bypass the syscall
> > interface. A few such things e
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 04:57:06PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > I doubt the second one. Apparently my understanding of how FSAA is enabled
> > in an OpenGL application is flawed
>
> Yes. For one, you seem to think thatit's just a matterof selecting how
> many pixels to sample. That's not t
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:56:09PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> > But it's not even supported in the DRI driver on the R100... It's not like
> > the wrapper can magically make functionality which isn't there to begin
> > with appear, but in order to do the tweak in teh driver itself, the driv
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:28:49PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> > >
> > > Well that sucks. I guess I'd never be able to enable super-sampled FSAA
> > > with your wrapper on my R100. Even though I CAN do it with a dr
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 01:23:42PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I did reread it, which is why I then suggested glXChooseVisual as the
> > point of change (since it's in visual selection that it's enabled), which
> > is exactly the reason why it SHOULDN'T be in the driver - a wrapper lib
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:21:46PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> Careful, let us stick to the technical discussion rather then personal
> attacks on how I choose to express myself. Don't attack the analogies
> themselves, but rather the content that preceeded them and the point
> that they were ve
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:15:10PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> >
> > > There's enough cases that the wrapper couldn't cover that we'd have to
> > > implement something in the driver anyway. For example, one of the curr
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 11:48:10AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 11:10:56AM -0800, magenta wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:22:39AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> > > I completely understand how the wrapper idea works. I'm just saying that
> &
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:22:39AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 03:52:39PM -0800, magenta wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:21:30PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> > >
> > > As far as I can tell, there is no way either an app or a wrapper libr
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:29:18AM +0100, Alexander Stohr wrote:
> The layer idea is not bad,
> but its more the taste of a hack.
> Remember that dri is OpenSource,
> so you dont need those hacks.
Just because something *can* be put into the source doesn't mean it
*should*. Have you ever heard th
Another note: A third-party tweak library could conceivably convert calls
for S3TC functionality into appropriate calls for ARB_texture_compression
instead.
--
http://trikuare.cx
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.N
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:21:30PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> As far as I can tell, there is no way either an app or a wrapper library
> could communicate this information to the driver. Yet, shipping "high end"
> drivers support and demanding users expect this level of
> application-to-drive
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:33:11PM -0700, Jens Owen wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> >
> > 3. Users should not be able to configure default behavior; applications
> > should specify all behavior explicitly if it matters, and expose this as an
> > application-level confi
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 01:57:48PM -0700, Nicholas Leippe wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 December 2002 01:06 pm, you wrote:
> >
> > I basically see three camps in this discussion:
> >
> > 1. Users should be able to configure default behavior using configuration
> > files (which would be selected based
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:18:03PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> > 1. Users should be able to configure default behavior using configuration
> > files (which would be selected based on argv[0] or similar)
> >
> > 2. Users should be able to configure default behavior using environment
> > variables
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:30:31PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I just thought of a solution which could possibly satisfy all
> > three camps: have a libGL wrapper library (loaded via LD_PRELOAD) which
> > overrides fun
On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 11:06:01AM -0800, Allen Akin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 12:57:44AM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> | This illustrates one of the bad points of using environment variables.
> | Will we have to add environment variables every time a new app is pushed
> | out the door? Bad
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:29:34AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> ... They are also often much more efficient and
> easier to use than config files (ie "just say no to another config file
> parser").
Another note: The amount of code needed to parse a configuration file isn't
signifigantly more tha
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:29:34AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> >
> > User preferences are an entirely different matter. I totally agree that
> > the user should be able to override default behaviors, but environment
> > v
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 10:32:50AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> > >
> > > Ugh. The internalFormat is itself a hint. If the programmer cares about
> > > how much storage is used or the quality, he/she should use GL_R
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 10:31:41AM -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 02:38:15PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> >
> >>>I'm with Allen in preferring that we don't add yet another environment
> >>>variable - es
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:31:41AM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 02:38:15PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > > I'm with Allen in preferring that we don't add yet another environment
> > >
On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 02:38:15PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > I'm with Allen in preferring that we don't add yet another environment
> > variable - especially for something which other OpenGL drivers haven't
> > needed.
>
> Hmm. Windows drivers tend to have a GUI setup utility, which often
55 matches
Mail list logo
