Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 18:21 UTC, submitted by GhePeU
David Reveman of Novell shares his thoughts on Xgl, Metacity, and more."I've been getting a lot of mail from people asking me about my thoughts on AIGLX, the GL compositing work being done on Metacity and nVidia's xdevconf paper. Instead of replying to everyone individually, I though I'd send a mail to the Xorg list."
Thread beginning with comment 98753
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I feel more partial to Xgl...
by subterrific on Fri 24th Feb 2006 02:05
in reply to "RE[2]: I feel more partial to Xgl..."
Member since:2005-07-10
For anyone wanting context, read the "Xegl lives!" thread:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-egl/2005-May/thread.html
Alan Coopersmith from Sun was the person raising concerns about Xegl being Linux centric. Several people point out that he is mistaken and that OpenGL/EGL as well as the input subsystem are platform agnostic. It is only the OpenGL/EGL stack and input drivers that are platform specific.
Member since:
2005-07-06
I've read arguments against this approach describing it as Linux centric.
So far none of the shipping versions of EGL have been on Linux. EGL is a Khronos API, http://www.khronos.org/egl/ It is totaly platform independent. Current implementations are on proprietary embedded systems and cell phones. It is likely that EGL will be used in the PS/3.
Quote from the Khronos page: EGL can be implemented on multiple operating systems (such as Symbian, embedded Linux, Unix, and Windows) and native window systems (such as X and Microsoft Windows).
Just because I built a non-released implementation of the EGL API by using the Linux fbdev drivers, the entire EGL API has now been tagged as Linux centric.
Edited 2006-02-23 23:53