Otto Wyss wrote: > Michel D�nzer wrote: > > > > Pretty much everybody seems to agree on this goal. The opinions differ > > on how to achieve it though, see the flamewars^Wdiscussions about this > > on the DRI, fbdev, kernel, ... lists. > > > Anyway this issue has to be solved and I do as much as I can. > > IMO DirectFB has a strong position since it's already working but that's > not enough. It's time to join efforts so everybody is working for a > common goal. And this goal has now to be discussed and written down so > anybody interested doing some work knows what should be done.
BTW, there are some papers by James Gettys and Keith Packard from OLS which I think are worth reading in this context: "The (Re)Architecture of the X Window System" (briefly mentions DirectFB ;-) http://www.finux.org/Reprints/Reprint-Gettys-OLS2004.pdf "Getting X off the hardware" http://www.finux.org/Reprints/Reprint-Packard-OLS2004.pdf (Abstracts: http://lwn.net/Articles/94202/ http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2004/view_abstract.php?content_key=44 http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2004/view_abstract.php?content_key=47 ) The way I understand it, their plan is to pull lowlevel hardware drivers out of X and either base X on exisiting OpenGL/Mesa/DRI drivers (2D graphics via 3D API because it is faster), or create a external 2D driver library, and only put some minimal infrastructure into the kernel, but keep acceleration in userspace. Johannes
