Brian Paul wrote:
>
> Allen Barnett wrote:
> >
> > Is there a difference (performance or otherwise) between using indirect
> > DRI rendering (say, with LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT) and just linking against
> > the Mesa library?
>
> Yes. DRI libGL used in in indirect mode sends GLX protocol messages
> to the X server which are executed by the GLcore renderer. Stand-alone
> Mesa's non-DRI libGL doesn't know anything about GLX. It effectively
> translates OpenGL calls into Xlib calls.
>
> -Brian
What is the relationship between the GLcore renderer and stand-alone
Mesa? Can the GLcore renderer take advantage of hardware acceleration?
I've got an application (I wrote) which draws wireframe images with
hidden lines removed by drawing filled polygons on top of the wireframe.
With glPolygonOffset enabled, I see very good images with the TDFX DRI
driver. With indirect rendering, I see "stitching" of the polygons and
the wireframe lines. I was trying to figure out which libraries where
actually doing the drawing and how to make my program use stand-alone
Mesa, indirect DRI and/or direct rendering. (At any rate, perhaps my
arguments to PolygonOffset are not good enough in general; this is
probably a question for the Mesa list.)
Thanks,
Allen
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
