On 10/1/08, Ian Romanick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any objection to unifying SGIX_depth_texture and ARB_depth_texture
>  in Mesa?  The ARB extension is a superset of the SGIX extension, and there
>  are no drivers that support one and not the other.
>
>  Specifically what I'm proposing is:
>
>  - Replace GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT*_SGIX with GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT* in the core Mesa
>   and driver code.
>  - Eliminate gl_extensions::SGIX_depth_texture.
>  - Have the GL_SGIX_depth_texture entry in default_extenions use
>   ARB_depth_texutre as its flag.
>
>  Opinions?

Sounds fine.  I'd be OK totally dropping the SGIX version too.

-Brian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Mesa3d-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev

Reply via email to