Re: [Libvisual-devel] SDL and openGL plugin issues.

[Dennis S. <sy...@yo...>]

On Tue, 2004-07-06 at 00:02 +0300, Vitaly V. Bursov wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 21:54:47 +0200
> Dennis Smit <sy...@yo...> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Vitaly,
> > 
> > If you have some time could you look into the following:
> > at: http://libvisual.sourceforge.net/LIBVISUAL_TODO
> > 
> > * Fixes in some GL plugins that show odd behavior after another GL
> >   plugin has been running (better state setting). (everyone!!!)
> Yes, I've already seen this, tried to reproduce this and failed.
> And I thought it was fixed...
> 
> > This is tiresome to debug but some GL plugins show up really odd
> > after another had run before (in the same execution) using
> > plugin switches. This is probably easier to monitor when you
> > adapt the xmms plugin to only show GL plugins and show them
> > randomly...
> Now I see. :) Indeed, this is due to settings left by prev. plugin.
> 
> Even worse, If a plugin allocates, say, a (large ;) texture and does
> not release it during cleanup, texture will still reside in video
> memory. Just like with madspin plugin: there is glGenTextures()
> call and no glDeleteTextures(). The same will be with other data
> like lists.

Would you mind to clean this kind of things up anyway if I gave
you CVS access to libvisual CVS ?

> Looks like the only way to reset it nicely (everything is set to
> defaults in any condition on any hw/sw) is to delete GL context
> and create a new one.
> 
> And here goes a problem with SDL. To make it work right now,
> you can destroy and create whole window or render surface in
> SDL words. This is a bad behavior... Each plugin change (well,
> gl-to-gl at least) the window will be recreated.

Yeah that is totally bummer, but if that is the only way for now...

> Another way to solve this problem is to use CVS version of SDL
> in 1.3 branch. Pros and cons are pretty obvious. Does
> anybody know then 1.3.0 will be released???

For libvisual-xmms we can't use SDL 1.3. SDL 1.3 is a must tho if it's
not just only because off the offscreen buffers...

> And the last way -- get rid of SDL and write everything ourselves
> or rip off some code from Scivi ;), get potrability problems and
> rewrite everythin to SDL back again when it will be released..

HEhe...

> Dennis, I really don't know what to do with it... :)

Alright, thanks a lot tho for the comment, it really cleared
things up!

Cheers,
Dennis