From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA55889 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:20:14 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: (from majordomo-owner@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) id LAA01279 for linux-list; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:17:56 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (owner-linux@relay.engr.sgi.com) Received: from sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (980427.SGI.8.8.8/970903.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA20612 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:17:54 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) Received: from snowcrash.cymru.net (snowcrash.cymru.net [163.164.160.3]) by sgi.com (980327.SGI.8.8.8-aspam/980304.SGI-aspam: SGI does not authorize the use of its proprietary systems or networks for unsolicited or bulk email from the Internet.) via ESMTP id LAA07715 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 11:17:53 -0700 (PDT) mail_from (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) Received: from the-village.bc.nu (lightning.swansea.uk.linux.org [194.168.151.1]) by snowcrash.cymru.net (8.8.7/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA04958; Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:17:42 +0100 Received: by the-village.bc.nu (Smail3.1.29.1 #2) id m10X8aD-0007TvC; Tue, 13 Apr 99 20:10 BST Message-Id: From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: Re: Resources in X11 port To: adisaacs@mtu.edu (Andrew Isaacson) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:10:52 +0100 (BST) Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com In-Reply-To: <19990413125254.A20170@mtu.edu> from "Andrew Isaacson" at Apr 13, 99 12:52:54 pm Content-Type: text Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk > If you (the porters) are willing to wait until June to have publicly > distributable code, you should develop for the 4.0 branch rather than > the 3.3 branch. There are a lot of useful new features in the new > code base, and the new design is quite a bit easier to code for than > the old. Actually I wonder if it will be. Not having seen the code because of the silly XFree about beta releases its hard to be sure. The X folks I talked to all pointed me at the 8514 driver - which is very similar in many ways to the SGI cards - both are designed for X11, both have no direct frame buffer access and they have fairly similar concepts. I would urge btw that anyone working on an XFree SGI driver releases it under a license like the NPL so that the XFree people can't hide it in a locked away beta release in future. Alan From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) Subject: Re: Resources in X11 port Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 20:10:52 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <19990413125254.A20170@mtu.edu> from "Andrew Isaacson" at Apr 13, 99 12:52:54 pm Content-Type: text Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com To: Andrew Isaacson Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Message-ID: <19990413191052.s7vz8OIxyCbG5wdSK735sfMDmz4zZk73R18-ZQuS0C4@z> > If you (the porters) are willing to wait until June to have publicly > distributable code, you should develop for the 4.0 branch rather than > the 3.3 branch. There are a lot of useful new features in the new > code base, and the new design is quite a bit easier to code for than > the old. Actually I wonder if it will be. Not having seen the code because of the silly XFree about beta releases its hard to be sure. The X folks I talked to all pointed me at the 8514 driver - which is very similar in many ways to the SGI cards - both are designed for X11, both have no direct frame buffer access and they have fairly similar concepts. I would urge btw that anyone working on an XFree SGI driver releases it under a license like the NPL so that the XFree people can't hide it in a locked away beta release in future. Alan