Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,398

    Default Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

    Phoronix: Mesa 7.3 Gets Primed With GLSL 1.20, GEM, DRI2

    It's been over four months since Mesa 7.1 was released and about three months since Mesa 7.2 (the stabilized version of 7.1), but now Mesa 7.3 is getting primed and ready to enter the limelight. As the first step, Mesa 7.3 Release Candidate 1 will be pushed out shortly. One of the primary features of Mesa 7.3 is enhanced support for GLSL 1.20...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=Njk3OQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    248

    Default

    so ATI users will have to wait for Mesa 7.5/7.6 to get DRI2 ?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,184

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by val-gaav View Post
    so ATI users will have to wait for Mesa 7.5/7.6 to get DRI2 ?
    I don't think Mesa itself is holding back ATI DRI2; it's just a matter of the driver(s) taking advantage of it (and using X.org 1.6). Jerome Glisse is working on DRI2 with the open-source radeon driver: http://jglisse.livejournal.com/1623.html

  4. #4

    Default

    yeh ati users may have to wait as i understand it

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Can anyone confirm if the Intel drivers now report OpenGL 2.1 support instead of just 1.4? Eric Anholt said he committed the fix to Mesa master in October.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    983

    Default

    Code:
    glxinfo | grep "OpenGL version string"
    OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.3-devel
    That's on my G45, running something close to 7.3 rc1.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    200

    Default

    Why don't all developers put their efforts into Gallium3D instead?

    It seems Gallium3D is going to replace Mesa3D totally, meaning a new proyect. Or it will use Mesa3D code in some way?

    I have high hopes that Gallium3D can accelerate the 3D support of new APIs and new OpenGL versions. Let's see if OpenGL evolves faster to compete with DirectX, their Brazil-like "bureaucrazy" and makes the Khronos Group seem like a bad joke.

    I even can't understand why the Khronos Group doesn't support OpenGL implementations financially and in a technical way.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whizse View Post
    Code:
    glxinfo | grep "OpenGL version string"
    OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.3-devel
    That's on my G45, running something close to 7.3 rc1.
    Yes! Thank you!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timofonic View Post
    Why don't all developers put their efforts into Gallium3D instead?

    It seems Gallium3D is going to replace Mesa3D totally, meaning a new proyect. Or it will use Mesa3D code in some way?

    I have high hopes that Gallium3D can accelerate the 3D support of new APIs and new OpenGL versions. Let's see if OpenGL evolves faster to compete with DirectX, their Brazil-like "bureaucrazy" and makes the Khronos Group seem like a bad joke.

    I even can't understand why the Khronos Group doesn't support OpenGL implementations financially and in a technical way.
    As far as I understand it, Gallium3D is more an abstraction layer than an OpenGL implementation. The graphics drivers are required to expose some low-level functionality to a general shader language, which in term is used to provide an OpenGL 1.x/2.x/3.x implementation which is transparent to all video card models/vendors/...

    So Gallium3D is more of a framework which is used inside of Mesa to implement OpenGL.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NeoBrain View Post
    As far as I understand it, Gallium3D is more an abstraction layer than an OpenGL implementation. The graphics drivers are required to expose some low-level functionality to a general shader language, which in term is used to provide an OpenGL 1.x/2.x/3.x implementation which is transparent to all video card models/vendors/...

    So Gallium3D is more of a framework which is used inside of Mesa to implement OpenGL.
    OK, so Gallium3D is something that is going to merge into the main Mesa3D branch and not replace it. Interesting to know.

    http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2008/0...re-it-fits-in/
    http://jrfonseca.blogspot.com/2008/0...gallium3d.html

    One of the things I don't like of Mesa3D and such is that isn't community based development but done by a corporation. They are hiding some parts of the development phase like shamed of something dirty they are doing with the code, instead following an open and community based development process.

    There's a git source code repository, but they expressed that some work is underground and not show. This is true for all FOSS projects, but maybe they don't follow the "release early, release often" totally and follow a somewhat conservative approach when releasing certain source code to the public (I'm not talking about end user, but those geeks able to use a compiler and look into the code). I just desire them luck and not being pissed off again with an Intel alternative like with TTM vs GEM.

Posting Permissions

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