On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 08:32 -0700, Kyle Brenneman wrote: > > That could work, although I would expect "vendor-specific info" to > > mean "random, arbitrary, and probably not machine-parsable". I'd be > > hesitant to try to impose a structure on something that's never had > > any structure before.
As far as I'm aware, there are zero servers that supply anything more than the bare version number in this string. But a new token is certainly the more conservative approach. I'll switch my branch back to using that. > > > 2) Do we want to add GLX_SCREEN to the list of fbconfig attributes > > > as well? > > > > > > UNRESOLVED. glvnd does not need that information, but it would > > > be a natural orthogonality, and GLX_SGIX_fbconfig mentions it > > > though GLX 1.3 does not. > > Possibly, but that wouldn't change the protocol at all. The screen > > number is included in the glXGetFBConfigs request, so it wouldn't make > > sense to add it to the reply as well. It would be up to the client to > > keep track of it instead. > Oh, wait. Now that I think about it, GLX already provides a GLXFBConfig > to screen mapping in glXGetVisualFromFBConfig, and indirectly from > glXGetFBConfigs. > > So, unless someone feels strongly otherwise, I think it would make the > most sense to leave glXGetFBConfigAttrib as it is. Sounds fine to me. - ajax _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
