Why care about indirect rendering ?

[Alan Cox]

On Iau, 2005-09-01 at 19:34 +0200, Olivier Galibert wrote:
> Of course, that would make DRI support in the kernel mandatory, but I
> don't think requiring a hardware device that does irqs and dma to have
> a minimum of kernel support is totally unheard of.

DRI doesn't need anything special from the hardware. It'll just suck for
certain types of operation. You can write an unaccelerated DRI
framebuffer driver and providing you stuff the backbuffer in RAM it
might even be useful.

> So shouldn't the target be not exactly a X protocol->GL translation
> but instead a libX11->some entry point in the DRI/Mesa chain? 

X is a network protocol...