Allen Barnett wrote:
>
> 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?
The GLcore renderer is based on Mesa.
> Can the GLcore renderer take advantage of hardware acceleration?
Not at this time.
> 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.)
Polygon offset often requires some tweaking to make it work on more
than one system.
-Brian
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
