On 08/04/2014 07:34 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> So it seems like I've completely missed out to send this series last
> week, so here it goes.
>
> The series covers
> - Consolidates the duplicating gl_basic_test(s) into two
> groups - all and all_but_cgl (as cgl is the wierd one this time).
> -
From: Marek Olšák
---
src/waffle/x11/x11_window.c | 15 ++-
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/waffle/x11/x11_window.c b/src/waffle/x11/x11_window.c
index 582cc02..b2e3631 100644
--- a/src/waffle/x11/x11_window.c
+++ b/src/waffle/x11/x11_window.c
@@ -53
On 19/08/14 18:44, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19 August 2014 16:51, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 19/08/14 16:41, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 19/08/14 14:43, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 14:34, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
MSVC h
Actually with my rant aside we should be safe with just opening
opengl32 and returning the function pointer regardless of the API
requested. I haven't checked with the specifications but I would
assume that ES* would provides symbols that are already in OGL 1.0.
How does this sound ?
-Emil
On 19
On 19 August 2014 16:51, Jose Fonseca wrote:
> On 19/08/14 16:41, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>>
>> On 19/08/14 14:43, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/08/14 14:34, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>
> On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>
>> MSVC h
On 19/08/14 16:41, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 19/08/14 14:43, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 14:34, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
MSVC helps us out with the final test by undicating that we're
corrupting the stack, which begs th
On 19/08/14 14:43, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 14:34, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
MSVC helps us out with the final test by undicating that we're
corrupting the stack, which begs the question - at which point are we
messi
On 19/08/14 14:34, Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>> On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>> MSVC helps us out with the final test by undicating that we're
>>> corrupting the stack, which begs the question - at which point are we
>>> messing up with the calling conv
On 19/08/14 13:42, Jose Fonseca wrote:
> On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> MSVC helps us out with the final test by undicating that we're
>> corrupting the stack, which begs the question - at which point are we
>> messing up with the calling conventions. This patch attempts to resolve
>> th
On 12/08/14 16:37, Emil Velikov wrote:
MSVC helps us out with the final test by undicating that we're
corrupting the stack, which begs the question - at which point are we
messing up with the calling conventions. This patch attempts to resolve
that yet the bug still persists :'(
Signed-off-by: E
10 matches
Mail list logo