On 2006-08-22, Richard Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It is hackishly possible in 2.6 kernels to sync to vertical > retrace. [...stuff about reprogramming timers...] You have to > run it as root as it makes use of both "realtime" priority and > direct I/O, [...] It isn't the best solution, as it wastes 6% > or so of your CPU time, but it
Which is precisely the point I was making: if you require this for a simple game, most of Linux users will tell you it is not acceptable for them to sacrify security/stability/performance, and reject your idea, just like the vsync ioctl for fb was rejected many years ago. > Linux can have good graphics, it's just that everyone, like > yourself, has a lot of ignorant reasons why they believe it > isn't possible. Where did I say it was impossible? Can you stop putting words in my mouth? I precisely had a tweaked fb to allow smooth graphics. How would I say it is not possible having it in front of me? > I don't know... I guess I'm just a genius. I don't know how > else to explain the lack of flexible scheduling, vertical syncing, > and a graphics API. I guess high resolution timers in 2.6 aren't your piece of cake then? > I'm not making generalizations, I just don't give a shit about > anyone else's inability to use a VESA driver. A VESA driver > would work for me, so I want one. [...rant about how only > you understand portability...] No, Linux isn't capable of that > [...setting a screen resolution...]. It may work on your system, > but I said every system, and it doesn't work on a signifigant > number of Linux systems. It just doesn't make sense to talk to you if your paragraphs aren't coherent: first you don't care if something only works for you and later you moan how just because you can't buy a Matrox card supported by the kernel to get hw accelerated graphics on both fb and X. > I'm not talking about old linux systems either, I'm talking about > ones that were installed last week. Many Linux systems are in > framebuffer mode on text consoles, making mode changes impossible, Well, you suck buying recent linux system. My good old PII uses framebuffer and can easily switch screen resolution with fbset. Oh... and any sdl game with the fb driver or directfb also can change the resolution. Oooohhh... All the time you rant about needing new APIs and libs but stick to whining about svgalib while everybody has already went ahead. Are you living in the real world? > Well, 30 FPS is absolutely sufficient, and wether or not it works > depends on wether or not they can get their shit done in 1/30 of > a second or not. Actually, try to sell any distributor a game that doesn't go up to 60fps. Bye bye... Oh, maybe you were talking about tetris, sorry. > Their greed is based on the assumption that that is what the user > wants, or perhaps simple ignorance, who knows. It's possible to > make a game with a configurable FPS. Indeed. I once played a first person shooter which rendered 60 images per second when nothing happened on the screen, and turning the camera dropped to 10. It was a very successfull game. > X11's ability to change modes without restarting is dependant on > which driver you are using, in particlar it cannot change modes > if it is using the framebuffer driver. Some distributions use the > framebuffer driver because it is a simple way to guarantee that > X11 will work without any problems. So on many systems, games are > stuck with whatever resolution and color depth the display happens > to be in, even though it is capable of many other resolutions > and color depths, simply because Linux lacks a graphical system > that is well designed forcing people to fall back on hacks like > Linux's framebuffer just to guarantee ease of installation. I can't see how that is the problem of Linux and not of the distributions that configure it so badly. > Because that's accelerated 3D. Find a game that runs in a simple > graphics mode, either 2D or one of the older games that did all of > the 3D in software. They don't require anything, they just tell > Windows "I want to run full screen in 640x480x8" and it happens, > no questions asked. Linux could do that too if it simply had a > graphics API. Hmmm... wait, so you don't care about 3d. Let me take a loot at some things you are so unaware of... Allegro, set_gfx_mode(640,480,0,0), documented at http://alleg.sourceforge.net/onlinedocs/en/alleg008.html#set_gfx_mode. SDL, SDL_SetVideoMode(640, 480, 8, SDL_SWSURFACE), documented at http://www.libsdl.org/cgi/docwiki.cgi/Introduction_20to_20SDL_20Video#initializing. Clanlib, CL_DisplayWindow, http://www.clanlib.org/docs/Reference/html/CL_DisplayWindow__CL_DisplayWindow.html. And plenty of other... I don't see how Linux is lacking a simple "I want to run full screen in 640x480x8" API(s) which you seem to demand so violently. > If you had thought about what I was saying you would realize > that the point I was making was that graphics in Linux shouldn't > be so difficult that it costs 20% of the development costs to > support Linux. And if you didn't have your head stuck in your ass you would know it's not the graphics that cost 20% of the development. I know Linux developers who simply reject supporting anything other than Debian/Fedora/Suse because each variant requires so many development resources. And guess what, they don't even do graphics. > I'll at least want one, but I suspect the price will be too high > for my tastes. I'm not a fan of 3D, so the cheapest video card > I can find is what I go for. I'd pay more for a card with open > documentation, but probably not as much as this card will cost. Buy a Matrox then, they are already there, cheap and documented. It would have saved you so many problems with Linux and stupid rants that get nowhere. I apologise for feeding the troll. I'll go back to my corner now. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
