> First, why is the ggi design better (in your opinion) than the linux fbdev,
> or the xf86 4 DRI? Any pointer to a document describing the differences,
> pros/cons?

Note, that GGI is more than KGI (our video driver model), which is what your 
questions are referring to.

Regarding fbdev: fbdev isn't bad. Actually we are very glad to see it on
Linux, as it keeps us from patching the linux kernel.

KGI drivers can be disguised as fbcon drivers using the kgicon glue layer.
I currently run such a driver.

The advantage in that configuration is, that I can use generic acceleration 
calls and that KGI drivers know about the monitor and autonegotiate modes.

The general advantage of KGI against other driver schemes is, that it
abstracts the underlying OS and mechanisms it uses to access hardware or to
give commands to a graphics driver.

A KGI driver can thus be compiled for very different system environments
without changing a line of source. I know of three such wrappers: The kgicon
code, the suidkgi (this one is unmaintained, so I suspect it won't work
currently), which allows to run KGI drivers in userspace like SVGAlib and a
driver for the famous mysteryOS I can't talk about.

DRI sits on top of X ... I won't comment on that more than this ...

> About ggi3d, what do you want to put in there? 
> A kind of rendering pipeline abstraction over openGL or so? 

Hmm - Jon can answer that one better, I think.

CU, Andy

-- 
= Andreas Beck                    |  Email :  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =

Reply via email to