Re: Utah GLX

[Seth Arnold <sarnold@willamette.edu>]

* Terry 'Mongoose' Hendrix II <darkskye@mindspring.com> [001212 00:14]:
> You're forcing people to give up performance, correctness, and
> hardware GL accelration altogether in some cases.

Aha!

We have found the root of the problem. :)

Please reconsider this statement. Who forces you to do anything? Does
Branden force you out of bed in the morning? Does Branden force you to
use his 3.3.x packages? Does Branden force you to use his 4.0 packages?
Does Branden force you to do *anything*?

Who forces you out of bed in the morning? Who forces you to go to work
each and every weekday in order to purchase video cards as nice as the
g400? Who forces you to own a computer? Who forces you to use X at all?
Or even the XFree86 implementation of X? Who forces you to use
applications that require GL support? Who forces you to use applications
that function properly under only one implementation of OpenGL?[1][2]

No. No one forced you to do anything. The tools[3] exist to ensure your
Utah-GLX setup is never touched. You chose not to use the tool. No one
forced you to not use the tool. No one forced you to not know about the
tool's existence, or to think the tool archaic.

Let us go over this again: no one forced you to do anything.

Upgrading the X packages is *entirely up to whoever owns the computer*.
If you own your computer, then it is entirely up to you. No one forced
you to do a blasted thing. No one forced you to upgrade X from 3.3.6 to
4.0.1. That is your decision, and your decision alone. (Don't you feel
empowered now? :)

Cheers. :)

[1]: Yes, I crafted this sentence to disparage the applications.
Consider it a different light or perspective on the problem, though I
don't doubt that Utah-GLX might support certain operations better.
[2]: Trademarks be damned.
[3]: = in dselect.

-- 
``Oh Lord; Ooh you are so big; So absolutely huge; Gosh we're all
really impressed down here, I can tell you.''