We all have limited resources - what other work would you like us to
delay to work on DPA instead? The DMX work your team requested?
The other issues raised in porting XVR-2500 to Xorg?
You've already spent your "get out of jail free card" by releasing
OpenGL 2.0 support without the Xorg support required by LSARC - it's
not up to us to dig you out of that hole.
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
Linda Fellingham wrote:
> Alean,
>
> We would prefer that you provide DPA support in x.org xserver.
>
> Rewriting our software pipeline to use other interfaces will seriously
> delay the delivery given our extremely limited resources.
>
> Linda
>
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>
>> This was brought up at our X/DDX groups meeting a couple weeks ago, and
>> once we got over the initial shock that anyone besides DPS was using DPA
>> (seriously? we had no idea), the discussion was that Xorg already must
>> have some sort of interface you should be using instead of porting DPA
>> to it - the existing Mesa OpenGL works fine without DPA, so your team
>> should be able to see what they use.
>>
>> -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com
>> Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
>>
>> Linda Fellingham wrote:
>>
>>> Alan,
>>>
>>> Re the second 1) below:
>>>
>>> If you provide DPA support for x.org, then we can provide the
>>> software OpenGL pipeline.
>>>
>>> The binaries ARE redistributable.
>>>
>>> Note that if the resource (engineering and legal) for doing the work
>>> to open source the non-3D party graphics cards were provided, then it
>>> would be relatively straightforward to do so, and I would be very
>>> supportive of that.
>>>
>>> Linda
>>>
>>>
>>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So, now that I've bored everyone to sleep, this leaves us with
>>>>> these possibilities for Indiana on SPARC:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Ship Xsun binaries & existing SPARC Xsun driver binaries (all
>>>>> closed
>>>>> source)
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Ship Xorg & use Martux's SPARC graphics drivers (all open source)
>>>>> with existing SPARC kernel driver binaries (all closed source)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is also a third choice I forgot to mention, probably since it's
>>>> the least desirable of all:
>>>>
>>>> 3) Ship Xorg with only the drivers provided by SPARC graphics (of which
>>>> only XVR-2500 is likely to be done by your October proposed
>>>> timeline),
>>>> and leave those with older SPARCs unable to run X in Indiana.
>>>>
>>>> Also, Garrett reminded me of another issue in a message to
>>>> ogb-discuss [1]
>>>> - my prior description only covered 2D graphics, and ignored
>>>> OpenGL. For
>>>> OpenGL, a similar choice will have to be made:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Ship existing SPARC OpenGL, with accelerated modules for existing
>>>> SPARC graphics cards (closed source - and I don't know if it's
>>>> redistributable) - with Xsun, this has acceleration for most of the
>>>> mid-to-high end SPARC graphics cards, with Xorg, only XVR-2500 is
>>>> known to have usable hardware acceleration - I don't know if the
>>>> others will easily work with Xorg or not once the framework is in
>>>> place.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Ship open source Mesa OpenGL, as we do on x86 (and virtually all
>>>> other
>>>> open source OS'es do), accepting that we'll have no hardware
>>>> acceleration
>>>> and break compatibility with existing SPARC OpenGL applications
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/ogb-discuss/2007-June/001033.html
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
