[Rapidly drifting OT] Re: Direct rendering: No
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, David S. Miller wrote:
> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 15:38:28 -0700
> From: David S. Miller <email@example.com>
> To: JLB <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: Direct rendering: No
> On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 17:51:15 -0400 (EDT)
> JLB <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Also, the only good ATI drivers are closed-source and x86-only. Some of us
> > care about such things.
> Not true, the xfree86 and x11.org ATI drivers support the 7500
> and similar families with full OpenGL acceleration. I know because
> this is what I used to play quake3 on my Athlon for a long time.
I meant "ATI drivers for -current- ATI cards". Sorry.
> > "Well, we turned off all accelerated 3D support so you can have pretty
> > fonts, without giving you a choice as to which you find a higher priority;
> > if you don't like it, spend 3.5 kilodollars on some fancy-schmantzy Sun
> > hardware AND write your own drivers, or just switch to x86."
> You are going to complain about free development? Where are
> your coding contributions to the xfree86 support of the creator3d
I would if I could. That sort of thing isn't within the realm of my
> > Frankly, I'd rather have accelerated 3D than pretty fonts.
> It sounds like it would be worth your while to work on the creator3d
> xfree86 driver to get the DRM support operational again. It would
> be an excellent and welcomed contribution on your part.
> I look forward to seeing your work.
I'm a sysadmin, not a driver hacker. Evidently, my opinion is worth less
(or worthless?) because I haven't the foggiest clue how to write or alter
a video driver?
J. L. Blank, Systems Administrator, twu.net
Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments.