Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: Current discussion about the future of free software graphics

2004-05-12 Thread Keith Whitwell
Ian Romanick wrote: James Simmons wrote: 1: Design must provide a mechanism for basic mode setting in a device independent manner from an application with user level permissions. (Basic to be defined) Ug. I see I'm fighting a losing battle but it doesn't matter. I couldn't never win this

Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: Current discussion about the future of free software graphics

2004-05-12 Thread Keith Packard
Around 9 o'clock on May 12, Keith Whitwell wrote: My one worry about the discussion is that because of confusion over where the X developers are hanging out nowadays, they are missing out on having their say on this - and they probably care deeply about modesetting. Egbert and I are here;

[Dri-devel] Re: [Linux-fbdev-devel] Re: Current discussion about the future of free software graphics

2004-05-11 Thread Ian Romanick
James Simmons wrote: 1: Design must provide a mechanism for basic mode setting in a device independent manner from an application with user level permissions. (Basic to be defined) Ug. I see I'm fighting a losing battle but it doesn't matter. I couldn't never win this fight. There is MONEY