Ben Skeggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 18:45 +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>
>> Ben,
>>
> Hey Thomas,
>
>
>> Your commit 1336989ec breaks front buffer rendering on Xserver < 1.7.
>>
>> Shouldn't the change that silently added a fake front attachment have
>> been accompanied by a bum
On Thu, 2009-12-31 at 13:18 +1000, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 18:45 +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> > Ben,
> Hey Thomas,
>
> >
> > Your commit 1336989ec breaks front buffer rendering on Xserver < 1.7.
> >
> > Shouldn't the change that silently added a fake front attachment have
On Wed, 2009-12-30 at 18:45 +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> Ben,
Hey Thomas,
>
> Your commit 1336989ec breaks front buffer rendering on Xserver < 1.7.
>
> Shouldn't the change that silently added a fake front attachment have
> been accompanied by a bump in SERVER_DRI2_MINOR_VERSION to signal a
Ben,
Your commit 1336989ec breaks front buffer rendering on Xserver < 1.7.
Shouldn't the change that silently added a fake front attachment have
been accompanied by a bump in SERVER_DRI2_MINOR_VERSION to signal a new
capability? Then we could have inserted some conditional code...
The way tfp
