>
> winterlion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Has this happened?
> > It wouldn't be hard - not a big jump from glide-target anyways.
>
> It is impossible to write an OpenGL target, as you can't set modes
> or even open something to render on with the OpenGL API. You could
> write a GLX target, which would be completely pointless as you might
> just as well use X directly and loose the OpenGL overhead.
>
> So far everyone talking about an "OpenGL-target" seems to be
> confusing targets with something else.
Not so. OpenGL gives you full access to a framebuffer once it has been
created (though obviously accelerated operations may be much faster than
direct pixel operations as you would expect). So once you have created an
OpenGL context, there is no reasons why you shouldnt run GGI into it using
OpenGL acceleration. Ok, you can't set modes without using glx or glide or
fb or whatever you have GL running on, but some framebuffers cant set modes
anyway, and you may be able to do it indirectly.
Nor is OpenGL an overhead, even under X, as it may be accelerated better
even for 2D operations. Clearly if you are running GGIMesa it could run very
fast by passing all operations straight down to the GL layer (though there
would be some issues of versions of GL etc).
More importantly when we get Mesa-glide running on Glide on the framebuffer,
there is the question of how to run GGI on this. GGI could either run over
Mesa, over glide or on the framebuffer. Or rather than use Mesa-glide we
could use a GGI on glide with a GGIMesa version accelerated for Glide
(basically a GGIMesa Mesa-Glide hybrid).
Or with GGI being generic, all of the above...
Justin
