Hello Ken, when quoting (fragments from) previous communications, please label them appropriately. Especially when you modify them and/or put them out of context. This will help to increase the "read-ability" of the entire thread.
> I was thinking of: > 1. Xorg 7.3 I'm already talking about what is going to become Xorg 7.4++ (current git). Porting the Sun-patches to a new Xorg-server revision is a ton of boring work, especially as you cannot just upgrade the server (and associated Sun-patches) in isolation to a new rev. It will also affect many interdependencies and costs yet another ton of testing. I.e. Xorg rev. and Mesa rev. have to be compatible. Sun's X11 group is certainly working on that day-in and day-out. But you have to ask Alan if they really take that trouble for 7.3, or if they are waiting for 7.4. Xorg 7.3 is badly tested (especially outside Lintel), yet doesn't offer many new features. I'm not sure if it is worth the effort or if Sun wants to omit 7.3 and then straight upgrade to 7.4. > 2. Expert3d, Expert3dlite, XVR-200, XVR-300, XVR-500, > XVR-600, XVR-1000, XVR-1200,XVR-2500,XVR-4000. > [PGX(8), PGX24, PGX32, PGX64, XVR-100 plus *all* UPA > cards in all their different flavours, variations and > models (many different SUNW xoptions numbers) whith > the single exception of the XVR-1000. Support for > host machines/pci bridges includes all Ultra and > Blade workstation models, with the exception of the > SB1500, SB2500, Ultra25, Ultra45.] Here (and at the bottom) you are throwing around with substrings of my original messages. I don't like this because you aren't referring to my original quotes. Yet change things. And it still looks very similar now (that's what I don't like), but I would never have written this. Unfortunately Santa Claus has already moved on, otherwise you could have added 10 Million Dollars to it, before passing it on to him. Do you have an action plan? How do you intend to get things like Expert3d. Expert3dlite, XVR-500, XVR-600, XVR-1200 supported? Why do you think a hardly used special purpose card like the XVR-4000 is worth any effort? Why do you list cards that are PCIe and therefore limited to the current platforms (XVR-200 and XVR-300), limited to those current platform with currently unsupported pci-bridges? > 3. Sun OpenGL 1.5+ "Sun OpenGL 1.5+" ?? Or Mesa? I don't understand. > So, what if we first fully port Xorg 7.3 with all the > docs/SDK/DDK "We" ? > over to SXCE/SXDE/Indiana?!? I mean a > fully tested and verified Xorg port that Sun > considers 'Solaris Ready' certified?? ??? What certification programs are you referring to? > > ~K If you find a manager who is willing (economically *able*) to finance all that, then we would probably be in paradise. But all that doesn't make sense, as Sun wouldn't earn a single Cent on that. BTW, anyone is free to start that work :-) > > > > > > -------> > The following chips/cards are already more or less > reliably supported by Xorg, as mentioned time and > again on this list: > > ###SUPPORTED:### > PGX(8), PGX24, PGX32, PGX64, XVR-100 plus *all* UPA > cards in all their different flavours, variations and > models (many different SUNW xoptions numbers) whith > the single exception of the XVR-1000. > Support for host machines/pci bridges includes all > Ultra and Blade workstation models, with the > exception of the SB1500, SB2500, Ultra25, Ultra45. Why do you quote this unquoted, then out of context? -- %martin This message posted from opensolaris.org
