Re: [Plib-devel] [Fwd: [Mesa3d-dev] lighting fixes (fwd)]

[Curt <cu...@in...>]

> Curt wrote:
> > I grabbed the latest mesa out of cvs and built it.  But, I got
> > software only rendering.

Steve Baker writes:
> Doh!
>
> > Anyone know how to build a libGL from mesa source that works with
> > XFree86-4.0 / DRI / Voodoo-3 and all of that?  The configure script
> > found my glide.h and libglide3.so ... but apparently there is more to
> > it than that.
> >
> > Anyone have any tips?
>
> Nothing other than the usual:
>
> 1) Make sure X is running in 16bpp

Actually I went through the whole procedure and got OpenGL running
accelerated in a window with my Voodoo3 when I first got it.  All I
did this time was replace the libGL.so with one built from the latest
cvs-mesa, and it didn't accelerate.  I removed the new libGL, and move
the old one back in place, and everything ran accelerated again as
before.

> 2) Either make sure that /dev/3dfx is installed and has rw-rw-rw
>    permissions...or run your application as 'root'.

This is no longer a requirement with the XF-4.0 / dri stuff.  But the
instructions for getting this all to work are either non-existant, or
old and extremely misleading ... or perhaps I just haven't stumbled
across the secret hiding place of the real, informative directions?

> 3) Don't demand stuff like stencil planes, alpha planes, etc.
>    If you let GLUT pick the defaults you should be OK.

As I said, applications run great with my current libGL.so ... but not
with the new one I just built.  So there is something additional that
I need to figure out with building a XF86-4.0 / DRI compatible
libGL.so.

> 4) Don't forget to "setenv MESA_GLX_FX fullscreen".

Hmmm, perhaps the libGL.so could be tricked into running like a
voodoo-1/2 mode with this, but the whole point of my buying a Voodoo-3
was so I could have accelerated opengl in a window. :-)

> 5) Use 'ldd' to ensure your application is getting the libGL.so
> 6) Use ldd to ensure that libGL.so is demanding libglide.so.

Actually libglide3.so in this case ...

> Does this latest version *have* to use DRI?

The latest of version of Mesa doesn't *have* to use DRI ... not at
all.  But, that is what I'd like to get working here.

> If so, then I'm out of my depth - but I'd wonder whether I had the
> right modules loaded in XF86Config and whether I have the right
> revision and type of X server (I guess if you already have 4.0 then
> that's covered already).  This is all getting *WAY* too complicated!

I've been continually surprised by the complete lack of documentation
with all of this new XF86-4.0 dri stuff.  I find basically nothing
useful ... the stuff I have found is full of old, outdated, misleading
info such as saying /dev/3dfx is still required which it no longer is.

I have no problem reading directions and trying to figure things out
first for myself, but I'm flying blind here.  I've seen some pretty
low-end open-source projects documented a *lot* better than this
... which has all sorts of commercial tie ins.  I appreciate the work
everyone has invested to get 3d working better under linux, but the
documentation problem is completely inexcusable.

Curt.
--
Curtis Olson   Human Factors Research Lab       Flight Gear Project
Twin Cities    cu...@hf...                cu...@fl...
Minnesota      http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org