On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 08:59:01PM +0000, José Fonseca wrote: > On 2002.02.22 20:57 Alan Hourihane wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 08:37:08PM +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote: > >> Jos Fonseca wrote: > >> > > >> > On 2002.02.22 17:28 Keith Whitwell wrote: > >> > > ... > >> > > What is libGLcore.a? Is that actually used? > >> > > > >> > > Keith > >> > > > >> > > >> > Is responsible for the indirect rendering and is only used is this > >> > circumstance. > >> > > >> > The question is if there have been any changes across Xfree 4.x &/| > >Mesa > >> > &/| DRI that could lead to incompatibilities... > >> > >> I can't see why there would have been. This stuff doesn't really talk > >to the > >> DRI or to the DDX modules in any direct way. I don't think it will > >need to be > >> replaced on downloads. > >> > >Keith, > > > >libGLcore.a is the internal Mesa code that drives indirect GLX. > > > >If anything changes in Mesa, libGLcore.a changes too. > > > >Alan. > > > > It changes, but it doesn't break compatibility, does it? The same thing > goes for libGLX. Both these libraries have they behavior pretty > standarized and are self contained so changes in their internals should > not be noticed by the other components. > Assuming that nobody would download a 10 MB set of experimental 3D drivers > for get improvements of indirect rendering we probably should leave these > out. > What I meant is from a bug standpoint. If there's a bug in Mesa which is fixed, then libGLcore.a needs to be replaced. This is only to do with indirect rendering. A severe bug in Mesa can cause the Xserver to crash as it's loaded into the Xservers name space. We've already come across this a few times, and more recently with the NAN/INF problems.
Alan. _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
