Ok, and what about compatibilty for non-Intel CPU Linux platforms?
Is this explicitly excluded from your goals? Clearly binary compatibilty
is impractical (although not impossible).
// Alan Heirich Compaq Tandem Laboratories
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
// (408) 285-1825 19333 Vallco Parkway, Loc 1-27 Cupertino CA
95014
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Leech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 1999 12:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [oglbase-discuss] Re: Non-X OpenGL/context standard?
On Thu, Sep 09, 1999 at 11:15:21AM +0100, Bernd Kreimeier wrote:
> Question: is there any chance to define an implementation
> level Linux specific *context* standard? An abstraction
> that covers XFree86 GLX, Glide-based fxMesa, Mesa's GLX
> emulation, and GGI or SVGA based replacements?
Sure. GLUT or another user-level abstraction layer that sits on top
of all those layers and exposes some core feature set common to all of
them. As Brian pointed out in his response, the existing Mesa library
already includes these things, while the chance of non-Mesa stuff
running under anything besides X11 is zero anytime in the forseeable
future.
> If this is not an outright stupid notion, technically
> speaking, then this "base" effort would be a unique chance
> to agree upon such an implementation level standard.
I don't think it's necessarily a stupid notion, although it's harder
than you are probably thinking and the end result would be useful only
for fullscreen apps rendering only through OpenGL.
However, inventing new window system integration APIs is
*explicitly* not what we're trying to accomplish here. The purpose of
this proposal is to solve a problem that will soon become a much bigger
problem: binary and source portability of apps using OpenGL/GLX APIs on
Linux. Let's stay focused and get this finished.
Jon Leech
SGI
