On Sat, 2009-11-07 at 16:29 -0800, Ian Romanick wrote: > tom fogal wrote: > > Is there any reason TLS for glX is disabled by default? Most systems > > support TLS these days, do they not? Further, I'm not sure if this is > > shared but my opinion is that the default configurations should cater > > to the common case. > > I vaguely recall there being some interaction with the X server. If > Mesa is built for TLS, then the X server must also be built for TLS. If > a non-TLS X server loads a TLS Mesa driver, it will fail with unresolved > symbols.
There's no intrinsic reason that the GLX loader couldn't support both, I suppose, but it would be kind of lame. There's still an interaction between TLS and selinux that prevents me from shipping it, but I'm sure that's fixable. Mesa does attempt to be buildable for more systems than the X server though. I don't know if (for example) OpenVMS has sensible TLS support. - ajax
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________ Mesa3d-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev
