This defenatly belongs on another Xrelated list.
--- Austin Yuan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 04:54:20AM +0800, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:35:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:53:26 -0400, Austin Yuan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 04:54:20AM +0800, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:35:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
maybe. they
--- Alex Deucher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:56:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Mestnik wrote:
if not, will xinerama be able to use 3D / Xv properly on radeon
(9000)
in the near future?
I don't think there are any plans to support 3D for
On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 04:54:20AM +0800, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:35:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
maybe. they will probably co-exist for the forseeable future.
regular multi-head allows
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 03:31:13PM -0800, Mike Mestnik wrote:
why doesnt radeon xinerama use mergedFB techniques to acieve its ends ?
The only big hurdel is wather or not the heads share enuff videomemory for
the entire FB.
That, and not necessarily all cards support the framebuffer
On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 10:35:42AM +, Ian Molton wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
For multi-head chips, probably. Even in that case, Xinerama is still
useful as a more generic multi-head solution that works regardless of
the underlying hardware.
--
Mike Mestnik wrote:
if not, will xinerama be able to use 3D / Xv properly on radeon (9000)
in the near future?
I don't think there are any plans to support 3D for xinerama.
Is there a technical problem or is it just lack of interest?
---
SF
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:56:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Mestnik wrote:
if not, will xinerama be able to use 3D / Xv properly on radeon (9000)
in the near future?
I don't think there are any plans to support 3D for xinerama.
Is there a technical problem or is it
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
if not, will xinerama be able to use 3D / Xv properly on radeon (9000)
in the near future?
why doesnt radeon xinerama use mergedFB techniques to acieve its ends ?
---
SF email is
On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:35:42 +, Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
maybe. they will probably co-exist for the forseeable future.
regular multi-head allows you do have two independant X servers
while mergedfb always creates
--- Ian Molton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
Is MergedFB going to replace xinerama in the long run?
MergedFB only workes on hardware that supports it, where both heads can
share the same continious framebuffer. This can only be done if the
DACs(heads) share the same video memory.
if not,
11 matches
Mail list logo
