Emmanuel Mogenet wrote:
>
> Is there a way to recompile Mesa so
> that it uses pure X calls and doesn't try
> to use the GLX extension ?
I'm assuming that you're talking about stand-alone Mesa, not the DRI version.
Stand-alone Mesa implements the GLX API but not the GLX X extension
or GLX protocol. All the gl* and glX* API calls are eventually
translated into ordinary Xlib library calls.
> The reasons for this request are twofold:
>
> 1. It has been my experience that more
> often than not, OpenGL problems with Linux
> are generally bugs in the GLX layer. It can
> go from incorrect display to machine reboots.
Can you be more clear? I'm not sure if you're talking about runtime/
rendering errors or install/configuration problems.
> 2. I'm not interested in Mesa's performances, but in
> its render correctness: I use Mesa as a measuring
> stick to check other HW accelerated OpenGL implementations.
>
> 3. I have a couple of machines on my LAN with no GLX extension
> whatsoever, and I often need to launch a Linux-based Mesa-linked
> app with it's display on that GLX-less remote head. And I can't.
Stand-alone Mesa can do this. The X server does not need to have the
GLX extension.
Actually, it sounds like you are using the XFree86/DRI libGL which
does require the GLX extension. If that's what you're using, download
the Mesa 3.4 distro and give it a try.
Just be careful that you use the right libGL.so then. That's a
really common cause of confusion.
If you're with me so far, here's some more info: RedHat 7.0 shipped
a special libGL.so that's a hybrid of the XFree86/DRI libGL and stand-
alone Mesa's libGL.so. It looks to see if the X server has the GLX
extension and uses the XFree86/DRI code if it can. Otherwise, it falls
back to stand-alone Mesa's Xlib rendering code.
I wasn't involved in constructing this hybrid libGL so I'm hesitant
to get too involved in it.
-Brian
|
