Hi Juan, On 26 September 2017 at 18:00, Juan A. Suarez Romero <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2017-08-22 at 09:20 +0100, Daniel Stone wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 21 August 2017 at 18:30, Emil Velikov <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 21 August 2017 at 15:44, Daniel Stone <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > My take on it is that the visual types are defined by the platform, >> > > and 0 is a perfectly sensible visual type for a platform which does >> > > not actually have any. >> > > >> > >> > Having the exact same visual type for all visual IDs does strikes me >> > as a bit odd. >> > That said, the spec does not explicitly forbids it so I guess it should be >> > fine? >> >> It should be, yeah. It would be quite odd to use anything other than >> TrueColor for X11, so in effect that only has one value for the type >> either. Maybe just imagine '#define GBM_VISUAL_TYPE_FOURCC 0' >> existing, with no others to ever be defined, and then it might make >> more sense? >> > > Hello, people. > > What's the status of this patch? It was tagged as candidate for stable, > and hence I'd like to know if requires changes or a R-b. > Considering the feedback, I think we can throw the series in the bin. At least in the current shape... Can revisit if we get some reports that need them ;-)
Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
