Subject: Re: XFree86 4.0.2 snapshot available (was Re: Successful NetBSD)
To: Andrew Gillham <gillham@vaultron.com>
From: Richard Rauch <rauch@eecs.ukans.edu>
List: port-i386
Date: 01/04/2001 14:23:25
> AFAIK kernel support is required for DRI.  NetBSD doesn't currently
> have any AGP specific support.

I wasn't aware that it was specific to AGP.  I assumed that it would
provide accelerated support on PCI cards, too.  Up to now, I thought that
AGP's primary point was to provide more bandwidth (as compared with PCI),
mostly for getting textures loaded into the 3D engines on the graphics
cards.  (Does your statement also mean that if I put an AGP card into my
machine, I couldn't use it at all with NetBSD?  Or could I still use it
more or less as a PCI video card?)

However, that kernel support is required is my vague understanding as
well.  Is there some fundamental reason that DRI support couldn't be done
in something analogus to the apeture driver?  (At this point, my limited
grasp of DRI is only at the highest level, as you can probably tell.  (^&)


DRI is something that I want to look into in the next several months, if
and as time permits.  At least to the point of understanding what's
required, and perhaps to the point of making some concrete contribution to
getting it up on NetBSD.  Right now, I'd say that it's looking favorable
that I'll find that time, though I may find myself out of my depth a few
times along the way.


> -Andrew
> 
> From: "Richard Rauch" <rauch@eecs.ukans.edu>
> 
> > My understanding is that DRI stands for ``Direct Rendering Interface''
> (or
> > Infrastructure?).  It is an enhancement for Mesa support to directly
> > access the hardware to accelerate the OpenGL implementation.  It is
> not
> > ``-current for XFree86''; it is a specific feature that was present in
> 4.0
> > (for GNU/LINUX), and is apparently now supported on FreeBSD.
> >
> > Is my understanding on this point wrong?  Or are you saying that DRI
> works
> > on NetBSD, now?  My understanding is that it does not.  But we can
> > certainly use XFree86 4.x with NetBSD, without this one feature.
> >
> > I'd love to hear that 4.0.2 with NetBSD 1.5 (even if only -current) is
> a
> > different story, w.r.t. DRI, than 4.0 was for NetBSD.
> >
> >
> >   "I probably don't know what I'm talking
> about." --rauch@eecs.ukans.edu
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 

  "I probably don't know what I'm talking about." --rauch@eecs.ukans.edu