hw/dmx/glxProxy
Hi. DMX introduced a fair amount of source code duplication. In particular, its GLX proxy seems to be based on older snapshots of GLX friends. Now, I've already addressed some of the simplest aspects of this. But, at this point, I would like some opinions as to whether I've grokked this correctly, or whether it is worthwhile to proceed with preventing further skews and dealing with those that are already there. Proceeding with this would entail some co-ordination between the various CVS repositories involved. Hence my query. Any comments? Thanks. Marc. +--+---+ | Marc Aurele La France | work: 1-780-492-9310 | | Computing and Network Services | fax:1-780-492-1729 | | 352 General Services Building | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | University of Alberta +---+ | Edmonton, Alberta | | | T6G 2H1 | Standard disclaimers apply| | CANADA | | +--+---+ XFree86 developer and VP. ATI driver and X server internals. ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Driver (i810) ignores modeline directives in Config File
Hi, I have a Compal CY27 laptop with the 82852/855GM Integrated Graphics Device (rev 02) (lspci output). Even though the BIOS allow me to change the memory allocated to video (32M right now), Xfree only see two built in modes: (**) I810(0): *Built-in mode 800x600 (**) I810(0): *Built-in mode 640x480 I already tried to replace the 800x600 mode by 1024x768 using Poirer's 855resolution , but it does not work (I loose the 800x600 mode, and can not get 1024x768, ending only with 640x480). Does any one know why this is happening? WindowsXP and a commercial X server (Xi Graphics) both can reach 1024x768. Regards, Sergio Peter Gale wrote: On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 10:10, Erwann Thoraval wrote: Hello, I had a problem with my laptop (a DELL 510m with a 1400x1050 screen and the i855 chip). It seems that the i810 XFree driver can *only* use the video resolutions which are listed into the BIOS. I also have a Medion laptop with 1280x800... and Alain Poirer's 855resolution patch fixed it perfectly... Peter Gale ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: hw/dmx/glxProxy
On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 07:57:04AM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: Hi. DMX introduced a fair amount of source code duplication. In particular, its GLX proxy seems to be based on older snapshots of GLX friends. Now, I've already addressed some of the simplest aspects of this. But, at this point, I would like some opinions as to whether I've grokked this correctly, or whether it is worthwhile to proceed with preventing further skews and dealing with those that are already there. Proceeding with this would entail some co-ordination between the various CVS repositories involved. Hence my query. Any comments? The GLXproxy code was written by SGI and donated to the DMX project. I would suggest coordinating with Guy Zadickario guy-at-sgi-dot-com as he was the main author/contact of this code. Also, if there are changes that you make, please submit patches to the dmx-devel list so that they can be incorporated into the other source repositories and thus minimize version skew. Thanks! ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: hw/dmx/glxProxy
On Fri, 6 Aug 2004, Kevin E Martin wrote: On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 07:57:04AM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote: DMX introduced a fair amount of source code duplication. In particular, its GLX proxy seems to be based on older snapshots of GLX friends. Now, I've already addressed some of the simplest aspects of this. But, at this point, I would like some opinions as to whether I've grokked this correctly, or whether it is worthwhile to proceed with preventing further skews and dealing with those that are already there. Proceeding with this would entail some co-ordination between the various CVS repositories involved. Hence my query. Any comments? The GLXproxy code was written by SGI and donated to the DMX project. I would suggest coordinating with Guy Zadickario guy-at-sgi-dot-com as he was the main author/contact of this code. Also, if there are changes that you make, please submit patches to the dmx-devel list so that they can be incorporated into the other source repositories and thus minimize version skew. Thanks! I think the first question that needs an answer is whether or not it is important that the extension being emulated through DMX be kept in sync with that natively provided by the same server. If not, then DMX's emulation can be allowed to lag behind, perhaps indefinitely. Otherwise, something more pro-active needs to be done to keep the emulation in sync. FWIW, GLX seems to be the only non-DMX extension in this boat. ... and, so, keeping CVS repositories in sync is not, at this time, sufficient. Marc. +--+---+ | Marc Aurele La France | work: 1-780-492-9310 | | Computing and Network Services | fax:1-780-492-1729 | | 352 General Services Building | email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | University of Alberta +---+ | Edmonton, Alberta | | | T6G 2H1 | Standard disclaimers apply| | CANADA | | +--+---+ XFree86 developer and VP. ATI driver and X server internals. ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
