[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: State of Linux graphics
    > As the author of Xgl and glitz I'd like to comment on a few things.
    > >From the article:
    > > Xgl was designed as a near term transition solution. The Xgl model
    > > was to transparently replace the drawing system of the existing
    > > X server with a compatible one based on using OpenGL as a device
    > > driver. Xgl maintained all of the existing X APIs as primary APIs.
    > > No new X APIs were offered and none were deprecated.
    > ..
    > > But Xgl was a near term, transition design, by delaying demand for
    > > Xgl the EXA bandaid removes much of the need for it.
    > I've always designed Xgl to be a long term solution. I'd like if
    > whatever you or anyone else see as not long term with the design of Xgl
    > could be clarified.

    I sent this comment to Jon before he published:
    "Xgl was never near term, maybe you thought it was but no-one else did, the
    sheer amount of work to get it to support all the extensions the current X
    server does would make it non-near term ..."

    I believe he is the only person involved who considered it near term,
    without realising quite how much work was needed...

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-08-31 00:41    [W:0.021 / U:10.800 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site