Adam Jackson <[email protected]> writes:

> This was necessary in DRI1 for a variety of reasons (SAREA ownership,
> VRAM layout, etc).  None of that is relevant to DRI2.  Which is good,
> because VT switch is an xf86-ism and I'd like to make DRI2
> ddx-independent.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson <[email protected]>

We still do this?  Not cool.

The only risk I see is if it means that new clients race ahead to trying
to do dri2 auth and fail because we've dropped master.

Attachment: pgpJXbo9BAqoH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel

Reply via email to