So, I've run into an interesting situation, and I'm wondering what should theoretically happen.
The FireGL driver (closed source, from ATI) seems to be the only DRI based hardware driver that supports overlays. When running apps on the localhost, everything works fine. The catch is when an app is run on a remote system and indirect rendering is used. In this case, Mesa is reported as the renderer (instead of "FireGL2 / FireGL3"), but glxinfo still reports the set of supported visuals that the hardware driver supports. The problem is that the glXGetConfig reports that GLX_USE_GL is available in the overlay window, eventhough, as far as I can tell, the built-in Mesa renderer does not support this. I've looked at the code, but the path through it is somewhat confusing for the indirect case. It seems as though glXGetConfig uses the screenConfigs that is exported by the driver. So, what SHOULD happen? It seems that this has "worked" with all of the other drivers because the hardware drivers support a subset of the visuals supported by the built-in Mesa. Is this correct? I would ask this at the Monday IRC meeting, but I don't think I'll be available. Since it's a holiday in the US, is there even going to be a meeting? I ask because I know that most of the people that still come are not in the US... -- Tell that to the Marines! _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
