On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 06:12:17PM -0600, Brian Paul wrote:
> Just continue when you hit the _mesa_test_os_sse_exception_support()
> function. It's a normal part of start-up. We found that the only
> reliable way to detect SSE support (both CPU-wias and OS-wise) is
> to try an SSE instruction an
Jacek Popławski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 06:12:17PM -0600, Brian Paul wrote:
>
>>Just continue when you hit the _mesa_test_os_sse_exception_support()
>>function. It's a normal part of start-up. We found that the only
>>reliable way to detect SSE support (both CPU-wias and OS-wise) is
>>
Jacek Popławski wrote:
> Sometimes when using gdb with my program I see error:
>
> Program received signal SIGFPE, Arithmetic exception.
> [Switching to Thread 1024 (LWP 2340)]
> 0x405cdcfb in _mesa_test_os_sse_exception_support () from
>/usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/tdfx_dri.so
>
> This is not m
Sometimes when using gdb with my program I see error:
Program received signal SIGFPE, Arithmetic exception.
[Switching to Thread 1024 (LWP 2340)]
0x405cdcfb in _mesa_test_os_sse_exception_support () from
/usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/tdfx_dri.so
This is not my program fault, because there is same
Garry Reisky wrote:
> I know Keith said he didn't want much feedback on this branch becaues it
> could be breaking severly. I just wanted to say great job on the latest
> checkins.
The breakages should be reducing now (hopefully). I didn't do some of the
more radical stuff I thought I might hav
I know Keith said he didn't want much feedback on this branch becaues it
could be breaking severly. I just wanted to say great job on the latest
checkins.
---
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkge
I tried to port Andreas Ehliar's mga-stereo-patch
(http://www.lysator.liu.se/~ehliar/3d/)
to current DRI-CVS.
I think its almost done, but now the big problem for me
(as a "non-dri-developer")
is to get the vblank-irq and the pageflipping working
without locking up the machine. (file mga_dma.c)
T
On Don, 2002-09-19 at 17:49, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Gatos does fix real bugs, and I don't see why people are so down on it.
> There seems to be some feeling among the XFree86 people that the Gatos
> people are rogue, just because they aren't as strict about checkin
> criteria as XFree86 is.
Warning
Unable to process data:
multipart/mixed;boundary="=_NextPart_000_00E8_84C36C4A.B5027B41"
