On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 11:38 PM, Ata Roboubi wrote:
> I am using an AGP ATI Radeon 9200 SE card (i believe with the fglrx
> driver) on AMD64 linux to render 3D on a headless server. I then
> gl_readpixels() and use the result without it ever being looked at on
> the interactive display.
>
> On xs
))In the monitor section add:
Option "Enable" "true"
See this page for more on configuring X using randr 1.2+:
http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/HowToRandR12
Will KMS come up without a display, or should Ata force user modesetting ?
___
xorg@lists.fre
))It looks like Xorg drivers on Linux platform are NOT kernel modules. Could
someone explain, or better point some brief document - what these Xorg drivers
are and how they are implemented ?
Sorry about the top-posting, let's try that again :)
The xorg drivers run in userspace, called by the X
The xorg drivers run in userspace, called by the X server. Where things get
confusing is that they can be written to operate in at least different ways.
Basic 2d-only drivers can directly access the hardware from userspace for both
modesetting and acceleration, and can run without a kernel drive
The challenge here is that everyone has different views of what constitutes
good support. As an example, many people consider 3d a must-have in order to
support Compiz / KWin effects, while historically relatively few have
considered operation in a VM to be important (I realize that is changing)
Firmware for your card has been released, but userspace acceleration code is
still under development. It's the acceleration code to *implement* Xv on your
GPU that you're missing.
When the acceleration code appears, you'll also need 2.6.35 or higher kernel
drive to support it.
-Original
AFAIK the fact you received one of these emails doesn't mean you are the
spammer. Everybody on the list received the email but I believe only one user
was unsubscribed as a result.
If you were the one who was unsubscribed, then keep asking questions ;)
From: xor
Pulling drm back out of the kernel tree seems like a hard sell, but the
ddx/mesa hw driver/libdrm set seemed like it might be a good candidate for
grouping.
I guess the core question is whether we expect the X-to-ddx and
mesa-to-hw-driver interfaces to be more or less volatile than the ddx-to-
you get a different answer from someone else go with
that ;)
-Original Message-
From: Brett Smith [mailto:br...@fsf.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 2:49 PM
To: Bridgman, John
Cc: 'Daniel Clark'; Daniel Stone; Owain Ainsworth; Octavio Rossell;
xorg@lists.freedesktop.
Is there a reason that graphics code can not be included in the GRUB2 project
with its current license ?
My recollection was that the X11 license was considered "GPL compatible" in the
sense that it *could* be relicensed if necessary. Graphics driver code is
included in the Linux kernel withou
>>fgrlx won't build on current kernels. End of discussion.
Corbin is talking about the NDA repository where we are working on open
source driver support in parallel with the IP review. We tried doing a
review and release on the documentation for the new engine, but after
two failed attempts decid
11 matches
Mail list logo
