<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [NV67] Incomplete implementation of OpenGL 2.1" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99033#c9">Comment # 9</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [NV67] Incomplete implementation of OpenGL 2.1" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99033">bug 99033</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:imirkin@alum.mit.edu" title="Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@alum.mit.edu>"> Ilia Mirkin</a> <pre>(In reply to Ilya Indigo from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=99033#c7">comment #7</a>) > If this card is able to support later expansion, which should be implemented > to the later video card, which shows a list of nvidia, why not add them to > this card? They are using software to work around the hardware's limitations. That software is not written for nouveau. > I thought, if in Mesa for nouveau declared support for OpenGL 4.1 at least, For GF100+ GPUs, yes. NV67 is a fair bit older. > the increasingly younger expansion should be implemented already, just > depending on the graphics card will connect them to a different set? > > Or something I do not understand, and for each GPU you write from scratch > every extension? Each hardware generation supports what it supports. For NV67, which is effectively a NV4x, that's basically the DX9 feature set. ARB_framebuffer_object is, in essence, a DX10 feature, but NVIDIA was able to provide the software fallbacks for the cases in the ext that aren't handled, and fast-path the cases that are. Nouveau hasn't done this. Patches welcome.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>