On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Patrik Stridvall wrote:
> > > However I don't think we should put DirectX related X11 stuff
> > > directly in x11drv it bloats it to much. Most applications don't
> > > use DirectX so it shouldn't need to load it in memory or even
> > > require its presence on the harddisk.
> >
> > Unused parts of binaries aren't loaded into memory. Only when
> > referenced
> > are they paged in from disk.
>
> I know, that why I added "or even require its presence on the harddisk".
> Think embedded system that is low on diskspace.
Not really... even Windows CE supports DirectX. And if you really have an
embedded device that can run a complete X server, and even one that has
enough support for XVidMode, DGA, and GLX to have these parts compiled
into x11drv to boot, then I pretty much doubt that the few hundred bytes
the driver stuff we need may add to x11drv is going to matter...
I suspect an embedded system low on diskspace would most likely run a
fbdrv, not x11drv...
> > - DXGrab
> > Well, here'a another reason for making x11drv aware of DirectX -
> > even with DXGrab, Lionel Ulmer with his DirectInput code has
> > experienced
> > problems with mouse input after a resolution switch, because the core
> > input code needs to be aware of the new resolution. As I remember
> > Alexandre rejected his ad-hoc solution, the clean solution would be to
> > move some part of DirectInput processing into the x11drv. The
> > DXGrab could
> > just be integrated with this.
>
> Indeed to move _some_ part of DirectInput might be the clean solution
> but being aware the existance of DirectInput is not nessary just
> export an appropriate function or two.
Well, if you feel that way, just work with Lionel on that, then.
> > of the rest
> > (using standard system-independent OpenGL calls). Lots of
> > portability to
> > be gained here... without adding too much code to x11drv.
> > (Most 3D work
> > would then still be local to ddraw, since it's the GL part
> > that's hard,
> > not the GLX part.)
>
> Agreed (in part). But it might not require it to be aware of
> existance of a Windows-like OpenGL just GLX. Same as in
> the other cases.
Windows-like? Never said anything about that...
