Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: X.Org 7.4 To Lose DRI2 Support

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mexico City, Mexico
    Posts
    899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    this really makes me want to learn C and help out, instead of pointless b_tching.
    Indeed... And even though I know some C and can certainly read code "comfortably", I often find that I don't seem to have the right mind-set to wrap around some of the problems the code tries to address... Said another way, I understand the code, I don't fully understand the logic behind the code. Which is a problem, as you can see, 'cause that means I can't do anything. Sure I can hack some code here and there, but that's about it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    101

    Default

    stop whining. I guess the DRI2 gets used when it is ready - regardless whether there is a Xorg release or not.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Another year without compiz. No problem for me.

    The only effect from compiz which is quite useful is the exposť effect.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bologna, Italy
    Posts
    15

    Default

    I can survive keeping switching Compiz on and off every time I want to watch a video. But that way Linux will never gain market share. If I were a (big) computer company, I'd keep shipping Window$ preinstalled.
    Two features are now very important to ship Linux as "dumb user desktop" (in graphic domain, at least):
    • kernel mode setting: stability, suspend/stand-by working without praises;
    • DRI2: flawless direct rendering in a composited environoment.

    Seen the DRI2 delay, I think ATI should provide some workaround ASAP, as already NVidia does from a long time.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,091

    Default

    Well, I found RadeonHD to already work very good with Compiz+Videos. I had no flickering at all with the latest code... it only flickered when I clicked into the video, but why would I want to do that anyway...

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by meden View Post
    Seen the DRI2 delay, I think ATI should provide some workaround ASAP, as already NVidia does from a long time.
    I would hardly call the nvidia solution a workaround. As annoying their closed nature can be I would say that their solution is fairly good. Basically they have ripped out the bottom of X and replaced it with their own solution. They have their own unified memory manager and they can do redirection easily. That is basically ttm and dri2 but specific to nvidia. (there are side effects as can clearly be seen by their crappy 2d acceleration)

    It is not a simple task to add these two things to a driver as can clearly be seen by the current debacle. Asking ati to provide their own might take even longer than waiting for dri2.


    besides I don't get what the big deal is with having videos mapped nicely to a compiz cube. Sure it is neat (and was things that made me go wow when compiz first came out) but even with nvidia there are downsides e.g. running xv with an opengl compositor does not vsync xv also I have noticed that with compositing enabled the video quality is reduced (besides the vsync issue).
    Last edited by _txf_; 08-05-2008 at 07:57 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yoshi314 View Post
    this really makes me want to learn C and help out, instead of pointless b_tching.
    Careful about those empty promises. We already have enough amateur C programmers making noise and spewing out vaporware.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    immudium, I don't really see a promise in that statement. He may just end up learning C and try to help out, then find that he shouldn't be b_tching.

    _txf_ I realize you are trying to say it isn't just thrown together, but isn't why you describe exactly that, a work _around_ limitations of X?.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,532

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by immudium View Post
    Careful about those empty promises. We already have enough amateur C programmers making noise and spewing out vaporware.

    That's been going on since the dawn of PC's. If places like source forge would actually clean house of dead / non-existant projects then it would making searching for crap alot easier. On that note I really wish sourceforge and the likes would move projects that have not been touched in a year plus to a separate repo called abandonware and projects that never got started beyond creating project page to vaporware.

    Just searching for projects on sourcforge that have been updated with new releases in a year takes the project count from 130547 down to 20263.
    Last edited by deanjo; 08-05-2008 at 10:09 PM.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    45

    Default

    For the one year thing, I would put that for projects not at stage 4 or 5.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •