From: Stephen Crowley <crow@debian.org>
  To  : ggi-develop@eskimo.com
  Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:24:09 -0600

Re: Matrox G200 specs released!

On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 07:51:29AM -0800, Aaron Van Couwenberghe wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 1999 at 01:01:23AM -0600, Stephen Crowley wrote:
> > How far along is libggi3d now, is it even usable?
> > 
> > I was thinking more along the lines of having the GLX extensions use ggi3d
> > as a backend and have Mesa do rendering through GLX. I think it would allow
> > a wider range of hardware to be accelerated through mesa although I'm not an
> > expert by any means, none of this is actually laid out yet. Any ideas?
> 
> hmm, as far as I know, GLX is just a reincarnation of Mesa -- the best way
> to handle this is to just give Mesa a ggi3d target. Making GLX use GGI3d
> would depend on that code being there already anyway, and the xfree people
> probably wouldn't adopt it, as they've already put so much work into their
> modular driver scheme for Xfree 4.
> 	Write a G200 GGI3d driver; Write a GGI3D target for Mesa; finish
> GGI3d ;). There are your chores for the next few months :P
> 
> The correct way for GGI to handle GLX is by way of GGIMesa running atop the
> X target; no GGI3d involved. Beyond that, acceleration responsibility is in
> the X server's hands.
> 
> And, FYI, ggi3d doesn't build, at least it didn't last time I tried. The
> only module that's in place is software rendering, and I don't know if the
> interfaces are fully specified yet (Jon?).
> 

ggi3d seems like it would be the best decision in the long run.  I'm really
interested in doing this, how many people are currently working on it? and
how much work does it need?

/-----------------------------------------------------------\
|Stephen Crowley      stephenc@wf.net, crow@debian.org      |
|Debian GNU/Linux     http://www.debian.org                 |
|GPG Key              http://va.debian.org/~crow/public.key |
\--- 8A8B 3B82 6EA7 CF4E 01A5  5B21 B378 981D D2E1 0D85 ----/