[Dri-devel] Re: [utah-glx-dev] Joining efforts

2002-04-15 Thread Philip Brown
On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:35:41PM +0100, Jose Fonseca wrote: I know that main reason for resuming the development of Utah-GLX was the difficulties involved in porting the DRM to others OS, such as Solaris. But why not reuse the DRI's Mesa and DXX drivers code and port and/or remake a

[Dri-devel] Re: [utah-glx-dev] Joining efforts

2002-04-15 Thread Jose Fonseca
On Mon, 2002-04-15 at 17:46, Philip Brown wrote: On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 12:35:41PM +0100, Jose Fonseca wrote: I know that main reason for resuming the development of Utah-GLX was the difficulties involved in porting the DRM to others OS, such as Solaris. But why not reuse the DRI's Mesa

Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [utah-glx-dev] Joining efforts

2002-04-15 Thread Jens Owen
Jose Fonseca wrote: I still don't understand how it's not worth to work on this but have separate equivalent code is. Well, it was just my two cents... Jose, I think you're asking the right questions. Personally, if I were supporting an entire OS, I would prefer to maintain only a varient

Re: [Dri-devel] Re: [utah-glx-dev] Joining efforts

2002-04-15 Thread Jens Owen
Philip Brown wrote: On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 09:19:35PM -0600, Jens Owen wrote: However, I have to point out--that whomever is doing the work get's their way; and since I don't have the bandwidth to support the solaris DRM drivers--that's all I'm going to say, except: If the current