-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 05:41 am, Ryan Underwood wrote:
It usually
works pretty well for simple stuff and especially things connected to
e.g. serial and parallel ports, because you can get a log of all the port
writes for a given function and work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 03 February 2004 6:42 pm, Alexander Stohr wrote:
Subject: *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Manufacturers who fully disclosed
It is possible to gain the specs for a chip by discetion for i.e R300
chip or NV 30 chips with the right tools
Dear all,
I have just put online a survey addressing the topic of leadership
in the open-source environment. Basically, my objective is to
identify the personal conceptions of good leadership that reside in
the minds of the contributors, in terms of leaders' _behaviors_ and
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Knut J Bjuland wrote:
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:52:53 +0100
From: Knut J Bjuland [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Subject: Re: Manufacturers who fully disclosed specifications for agp
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Ryan Underwood wrote:
Is there some special circumstance you have to fall under to qualify for
R300 specs? It seems there are a lot of people wishing they had them
and not a lot of people saying I've got em... :)
And in any way, i guess this doesn't include the
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Ian Romanick wrote:
where is the docs for the VSA based cards (voodoo4/voodoo5)? I have
been unable to locate them.
In a chest in a basement at Nvidia somewhere, with a lock on it,
behind a bunch of old filing cabinets, in a room at the end of a
very long hallway, with
David,
Just to let you know that I disagree with this decision.
The original license is clear and simple. It makes it simple for
people to use our code without having to consult any lawyers.
The new license might be confusing, and it contains an unpleasant
``advertising clause'' that might
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:37, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
PCI-Xpress is programmatically identical to PCI, so I don't forsee any
problems in that regard.
Yes, its identical to PCI in terms of the interface presented to the OS
so configuration probably won't be an issue, but there is code in
Brad Hards wrote:
Is it possible to insert a shim in the Windows video call chain? We
have
something like that for USB
(http://sourceforge.net/projects/usbsnoop/) and
it works pretty well.
Do you mean between a Windows display driver and the PCI bus, so that
you can snaggle all the I/O port
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 10:12:19AM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
|
| Okay, that's just weird. Normally the Nvidia extension string is about
| 3 pages long.
Just for reference, here's the direct-rendering version (table of
Visuals omitted):
name of display: :0.0
display: :0 screen: 0
direct
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 06:16:44PM +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
Is it possible to insert a shim in the Windows video call chain? We have
something like that for USB (http://sourceforge.net/projects/usbsnoop/) and
it works pretty well.
Alternatively, are there tools (even for pay) that can
On 4 Feb 2004, John Dennis wrote:
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:37, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
PCI-Xpress is programmatically identical to PCI, so I don't forsee any
problems in that regard.
Yes, its identical to PCI in terms of the interface presented to the OS
so configuration probably
Thanks for subscribing. You will receive one uplifting
message each week, straight from Eliza Bloom.
You are welcome to invite your friends to join this list.
They can do so by sending any
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here are a few other complimentary publications you may find interesting:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
On 4 Feb 2004, John Dennis wrote:
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 17:37, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
PCI-Xpress is programmatically identical to PCI, so I don't forsee any
problems in that regard.
Yes, its identical to PCI in terms of the
Hi!
This is a general question on X client design. Please excuse me that
it is not directly related to the XFree86 Project.
Imagine there are two clients running the same code:
while (!done)
{
XWindowEvent(... | VisibilityChangeMask, theEvent);
switch (theEvent.type)
On a modern desktop system, you should probably use window manager hints
to perform this function, and let the window manager do the rest.
http://freedesktop.org/standards/wm-spec/1.3/
For example, using NET_WM_STATE you can specify that your application's
window should be
02/04/04 20:21:09
eShield (Version 5.0 D1a (5.0.17.3)) - http://www.Ositis.com/
Antivirus Vendor: Trend Micro, Inc.
Scan Engine Version: 6.810-1005
Pattern File Version: 753.58318 (Timestamp: 2004/02/03 11:09:28)
Machine name: AVStripper
Machine IP address: 172.16.1.246
Client: 66.136.200.100
Title: KITVESTIBA
Respeitamos
sua privacidade. Caso queira ser removido de nossa lista
de e-mails, siga as instrues presentes no rodap desta
mensagem.
Ian Romanick wrote:
Andreas Stenglein wrote:
after setting LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT=1
glxinfo shows
OpenGL version string: 1.5 Mesa 6.0
but doesnt show all extensions necessary for OpenGL 1.5
An application only checking for GL_VERSION 1.5 would probably fail.
Any idea what would happen with
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 00:56, Ian Romanick wrote:
Does anyone know if either the ATI or Nvidia closed-source drivers
support ARB_texture_compression for indirect rendering? If one of them
does, that would give us a test bed for the client-side protocol
support. When that
Brian Paul wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
That's *bad*. It is currently *impossible* to have GL 1.5 with
indirect rendering because some of the GLX protocol (for
ARB_occlusion_query ARB_vertex_buffer_objects) was never completely
defined. Looking back at it, we can't even advertise 1.3 or 1.4
Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 00:56, Ian Romanick wrote:
Does anyone know if either the ATI or Nvidia closed-source drivers
support ARB_texture_compression for indirect rendering? If one of
them does, that would give us a test bed for the client-side protocol
Ian Romanick wrote:
Brian Paul wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
That's *bad*. It is currently *impossible* to have GL 1.5 with
indirect rendering because some of the GLX protocol (for
ARB_occlusion_query ARB_vertex_buffer_objects) was never completely
defined. Looking back at it, we can't even
Am 2004.02.04 21:00:14 +0100 schrieb(en) Brian Paul:
Ian Romanick wrote:
[snip]
Making that change and changing the server-side to not advertise a core
version that it can't take protocol for would fix the bug for 4.4.0. Do
you think anything should be done to preserve text after the
24 matches
Mail list logo
