airlied at gmail.com
Sun Feb 20 15:00:04 PST 2005
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.
Yeah I totally agree.. MiniGLX should die.. I was just curious to see
what would be needed to get it working, I believe EGL + one or two
extensions from us would be a much better platform to build on ..
> 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.
And it gets more hacked everytime I add another piece of the full GLX
to it to do something, ... when Adam is thinks he has something worth
looking at I'd gladly move everything to using it ...
It's also a bad hack that the current miniglx sample_server has to be
run then the X server, current miniglx I don't think supports
rendering in its "server" application..
More information about the xorg