From: Brian P. <bri...@tu...> - 2005-02-20 16:27:28
|
Dave Airlie wrote: > Hi, > Well I spent the day hacking and managed to get Xgl running on top > of Mesa solo, the solo stuff I've checked into Mesa, Neat! > The glitz backend for miniglx and the Xserver miniglx stuff are up at > http://www.skynet.ie/~airlied/patches/xminiglx/ > > There is no input hooked up to it yet.. a Linux /dev/input hook mightn't > be that hard to do, I wonder though whether trying to work with the > kdrive stuff that is already there might be a better option, I see keithp > committed some event device stuff recently. > > I'm not sure when I'll get a chance to do anything else on it... I'm sure > the miniglx backend could be cleaned up a bit.. (i.e. I hacked a lot of it > out as miniglx doesn't support it ..) In your other message, you wrote: > building an Xserver on top of mesa solo is a bit of a nightmare in terms > of includes and defines .. as an Xserver requires all the X types to build > but solo has its own set of defines/typedefs that don't match what the > Xserver has... so calling XCreateWindow is a bit painful for example... > glitz-glx also includes X headers... (not sure if it really needs them as > glx.h should pull in any necessary headers... I've mentioned this before: my thinking is that for the long term, mini GLX could/should be replaced by a different API, such as EGL (from OpenGL-ES) plus a few extensions. Mini GLX is a hack. It filled a specific need when it was created but I'm not sure it's an appropriate base for large projects. An enhanced EGL interface could be a nice clean foundation. Xgl could layer upon it and other people could use it as-is for projects where X isn't wanted. Hopefully, other IHVs would adopt/implement it too. What do you think of something like that, Dave? -Brian |