José Fonseca wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 06:55:08PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
Brian Paul wrote:
Unfortunately, we can't change this without breaking the current libGL /
driver ABI. I'm _really_ hesitant to go there.
Oh wow, I missed this. (I've been sleeping really badly lately &
everyt
On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 06:55:08PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Brian Paul wrote:
> >Unfortunately, we can't change this without breaking the current libGL /
> >driver ABI. I'm _really_ hesitant to go there.
>
> Oh wow, I missed this. (I've been sleeping really badly lately &
> everything's
On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 10:38:12AM -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
>
> OK, I'm getting caught up on email and have read through this thread.
> Comments follow, and in subsequent messages...
>
> José Fonseca wrote:
> ...
>
> I'm in favor of this. A while back I introduced code to do this with
> GLcont
Brian Paul wrote:
OK, I'm getting caught up on email and have read through this thread.
Comments follow, and in subsequent messages...
José Fonseca wrote:
As I've been writing the Mesa C++ wrappers I've come across some
dificulties posed by the way the interfaces are exported. As I
progressed I
Keith Whitwell wrote:
José Fonseca wrote:
2. On user space, the current drivers are structured (with some
exceptions not relevent now) as follows:
Client application
| |
v v
glapiGLX
| |
v v
Mesa DRI
| |
v v
OK, I'm getting caught up on email and have read through this thread.
Comments follow, and in subsequent messages...
José Fonseca wrote:
As I've been writing the Mesa C++ wrappers I've come across some
dificulties posed by the way the interfaces are exported. As I
progressed I started to realize
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 11:49:35PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> José Fonseca wrote:
> >Were you thinking going the full way now for the vtxfmt rework? (Sorry
> >for asking and not looking to the code myself, but I don't know exactly
> >what's its state and where to start, and I'm also with my han
José Fonseca wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 08:29:02PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
José Fonseca wrote:
That is, instead of Mesa acting as the middle man, it should act more as
a library. This specificaly means that, instead of (phony names):
userapp.c: glEnable(GL_TEXTURE);
mesa.c: _mes
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 08:29:02PM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> José Fonseca wrote:
> >That is, instead of Mesa acting as the middle man, it should act more as
> >a library. This specificaly means that, instead of (phony names):
> >
> >userapp.c: glEnable(GL_TEXTURE);
> >
> >mesa.c:
José Fonseca wrote:
As I've been writing the Mesa C++ wrappers I've come across some
dificulties posed by the way the interfaces are exported. As I
progressed I started to realize I was loosing too much time and effort
trying to fight the system, and the system in this case - Mesa - needs
not to be
As I've been writing the Mesa C++ wrappers I've come across some
dificulties posed by the way the interfaces are exported. As I
progressed I started to realize I was loosing too much time and effort
trying to fight the system, and the system in this case - Mesa - needs
not to be fought, but adapted
11 matches
Mail list logo
