Re: [Mesa3d-dev] glxinfo output for Radeon 9250, Mesa 6.5.1

2006-08-26 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 11:29 -0600, Brian Paul wrote: Chris Rankin wrote: BTW, this is what glxinfo says about my display. Notice the confusion about visual 0x4b. $ glxinfo [...] visual x bf lv rg d st colorbuffer ax dp st accumbuffer ms cav id dep cl sp sz l ci b ro r

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Radeon 9200 GetProgramiv(GL_VERTEX_PROGRAM_ARB, ...) crashes

2006-08-26 Thread Chris Rankin
--- Brian Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For the GL_PROGRAM_UNDER_NATIVE_LIMITS_ARB query? I guess it should return GL_TRUE if there's no actual program. The attached patch should fix that. Index: r200_vertprog.c === RCS

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Mesa 6.5.1 demo apps reporting implementation errors with R200

2006-08-26 Thread Chris Rankin
--- Roland Scheidegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, I have managed to enable GL_ATI_fragment_shader by increasing the number of texture units to 6 Unless you're using a old driver version, 6 is the default since quite some time (5 months) so you don't have to do anything. Heh, Fedora

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] [PATCH] Static dispatch cleanup

2006-08-26 Thread Roland Scheidegger
Ian Romanick wrote: This patch removes all of the static dispatch functions that I think can be safely removed for the 6.5.1 release. The attached patch only includes the changes to the .xml files. You'll need to 'make -C src/mesa/glapi' to get the rest of the changes. I wrote a script

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Radeon 9200 GetProgramiv(GL_VERTEX_PROGRAM_ARB, ...) crashes

2006-08-26 Thread Chris Rankin
--- Roland Scheidegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You may have a point but I fail to see why it would make any difference since the return value is never used currently anyway. Maybe you just got lucky. Hmm, it was a very repeatable event - I don't think I'm *that* lucky. However, maybe

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Radeon 9200 GetProgramiv(GL_VERTEX_PROGRAM_ARB, ...) crashes

2006-08-26 Thread Roland Scheidegger
Chris Rankin wrote: --- Roland Scheidegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You may have a point but I fail to see why it would make any difference since the return value is never used currently anyway. Maybe you just got lucky. Hmm, it was a very repeatable event - I don't think I'm *that*