Now I'm curious. Is it the case that every DRI1 driver *could be* a DRI2 driver with enough effort? Not talking about emulating hardware features.
Patrick On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Dave Airlie <airl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Connor Behan <connor.be...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On 01/03/12 01:36 AM, Dave Airlie wrote: > >> > >> You can still build r128_dri.so from Mesa 7.11 and it will work with > later > >> Mesa libGLs fine. You just can't build it from Mesa 8.0 source anymore. > > > > Really? Even if no one updates r128 to stay compatible with new libGLs > and > > no one updating libGL gives a second thought as to whether that update > will > > break r128? I thought the whole point of removing DRI1 drivers is that > most > > of you are too pressured to keep that promise. If the plan really is to > > update libGL carefully so that DRI1 drivers will always work with it, > then > > it seems like their removal does nothing but save a few MB of space on > the > > git server. > > Thats the plan, some distros have to keep shipping older drivers, but > also want to ship newer drivers. > > the libGL -> driver interface is a lot more standard than the internal > mesa<->driver interfaces, and are not the same thing. > > Removing the drivers allowed major simplification of mesa internal > interfaces not the GL->driver interface. > > It doesn't save any space on the git server since git holds all the > history ever. > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev >
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
