Jose Fonseca wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-03-07 at 17:23, Brian Paul wrote: > > ... > > > > You seem to have been confused by "texture levels" before. Looks like > > you've figured it out now. It's basically the maximum number of mipmap > > levels AND it's related to max texture size. > > > > -Brian > > Right after I started this thread I read carefully the OpenGL > specification regarding this (which I confess I should had done before > and not after) and there I found the explanation of texture levels as in > "levels of detail", as I initially thought. > > Nevertheless I didn't found an explanation of why the maximum texture > size was being derived from the maximum texture level in Mesa. In the > specs it says that the the maximum allowable size of a texture must be > _at least_ 2^(k-lod)-2*b_t , and not equal.
On which page, please? > Otherwise, where does it > stay a card that's not capable of mipmapping but can hold textures > bigger than 1x1? I don't understand. The spec seldom specifically talks cards/hardware. It's expected that when a hardware implementation of OpenGL can't implement the spec that software should be used instead. -Brian _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
