On Wednesday 26 July 2006 14:50, Attila Kinali wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:52:07 +0200 > > Lourens Veen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I also agree that we need more flexibility than a simple bunch of > > bits, but I'm with the others on not using XML. While XML > > definitely offers the flexibility that we need, is just too complex > > to parse for this, and binary formats currently used for processing > > don't fit the bill either. > > I somewhat fail to see what additional flexibility we need. > Please remember, i'm only talking about a driver for OGA > and not a generic driver for all possible devices.
Well, if you look at the amount of different Radeons mentioned in the X driver sources for example, it seems to me that in the future, we might have a lot of different chips to deal with. Not just OGA1 in a few variants, but OGA2...OGAn in all their versions as well. To be honest, I haven't really got a specific idea for this either, but to have a fixed number of bits for something open-ended like features on a card seems like asking for trouble. If we have the space in the PROM, why not make it slightly more generic... Lourens
pgpEfWd0iVnAq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
