Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,834

    Default Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

    Phoronix: Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

    Glamor, an open-source project that up until now has received little community attention or public acknowledgement outside of its small development group, has now been called to be merged into the X.Org Server. But what is Glamor?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTk0OA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    285

    Default

    ismell a new benchmark article sometime soon

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    191

    Default

    sound like worse analogue of Xorg/XA and that looks like because Intel just can't play with everyone else: DRI1 vs DRI2, GEM vs TTM, UXA/SNA vs EXA, now this crap against Xorg state tracker that were around for quite some time.
    they almost have their own separate graphic stack by now.

    rumour has it that they will finally abandon MeeGo in favour of Android soon.
    everything Intel does turns out to be half-baked and then dies as soon as it looses interest in it, OSS or not, like someone there always struggles to do some good shit but it comes out weird.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Yep, that's the feel I get too. Re-inventing things just for Intel.

    Of course it's Intel's decision and hours to do so...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,137

    Default Intel: it's too much work to rewrite our driver to use Gallium

    So instead, we'll rewrite half the entire graphics stack to work with our drivers only.

    Yeah, that's the ticket.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    370

    Default

    That kind of stuff is reason enough for me to stay away from Intel hardware.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    So instead, we'll rewrite half the entire graphics stack to work with our drivers only.

    Yeah, that's the ticket.
    Remember that both ATI and Nvidia have done just as much rewriting for their binary blob drivers, its just that Intel happens to open source their work.

    I wonder how much of the Intel stuff is done the way it is so that Intel can share code with their Windows drivers (I know that AMD and Nvidia share a lot of code with the Windows drivers)

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jonwil View Post
    Remember that both ATI and Nvidia have done just as much rewriting for their binary blob drivers, its just that Intel happens to open source their work.

    I wonder how much of the Intel stuff is done the way it is so that Intel can share code with their Windows drivers (I know that AMD and Nvidia share a lot of code with the Windows drivers)
    As far as I know, Intel keeps it's Linux and Windows drivers teams completely separated for legal reasons, to the point that they aren't even allowed to attend the same meetings. So that no one can complain the Linux driver is based on code Intel has licensed for it's windows driver.

    That's somewhat old information so maybe things have changed, but I don't think so.


    And of course AMD/NVidia have to rewrite lots of code, because of the licensing issue. Intel's drivers don't require that and they still do it. That's why it's so disappointing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,111

    Default

    Intel's linux and mac drivers have hugely better quality than their windows drivers (in opengl, of course). That alone speaks that all three have separate teams.

Posting Permissions

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