> I'm planing on
> having DRISUP_BOTH, DRISUP_BSD, DRISUP_LINUX, DRISUP_NONE
> defined for the 3rd element.
I dont like the "both" thing. The design looks for me rather
like a bitfild than an enum... so this would be the solution:
(DRISUP_BSD | DRISUP_LINUX)
a DRISUP_ALL would make more s
--- Eric Anholt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-09 at 15:04, Mike Mestnik wrote:
> > I'm using the new linux devfs and It seams to me that the DRI can't at this time
>use devfs the
> way
> > it should. If i'm not mistaken the kernel module dosen't realy know how to find
>supported
--- Eric Anholt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently running Linux GL programs on FreeBSD doesn't work for most
> people because xf86drm.c checks to see if the dri device has the major
> number expected. When using linux *_dri.so's (which use this code) they
> find the FreeBSD dri device, whic
Currently running Linux GL programs on FreeBSD doesn't work for most
people because xf86drm.c checks to see if the dri device has the major
number expected. When using linux *_dri.so's (which use this code) they
find the FreeBSD dri device, which has a different number, so it either
fails if non-
