Am Donnerstag, 19. Dezember 2002 05:10 schrieb Linus Torvalds:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> > By implementing S3TC without a patent license, the DRI team would be
> > opening the DRI project up for potential litigation.
>
> On the other hand, by being too timid, the DRI team can also eve
Am Donnerstag, 19. Dezember 2002 16:32 schrieb Thomas Dodd:
> Nicholas Leippe wrote:
> >On Wednesday 18 December 2002 11:20 pm, you wrote:
> >>On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 08:10:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >>>You have to balance things out. Yes, the US is litiginous, and clearly
> >>> way too mu
I would like to beg for the inclusion of #define PCIGART_ENABLED in radeon_dri.c,
radeon_cp.c and the applied ring buffer tweak to the XFree86 CVS. The pci changes
shouldnt affect any other system and do allow rather stable 3D accelerated
environment, with a properly configured XF86Config-4 file
On Don, 2002-12-19 at 14:39, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Currently, an arbitrary number of signals can be scheduled, potentially
> exhausting kernel memory and/or causing lots of useless list traversal
> in the interrupt handler. I guess the number of pending signals needs to
> be limited, or is there a
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 12:43:48PM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> > But they're not transferring the license to others, they're just
> > providing a reference implementation. nVidia themselves wouldn't be
> > sued for it, but someone releasing new software using that
> > implementa
BUY
your
Printer
INK and Laser
Toner
direct
from MANUFACTURER
at a fraction of retail prices
ENTER
NOW & SAVE
up to 85%
Geoffrey Antos wrote:
I believe that it is safe to go ahead and implement S3TC texture
decompression code in DRI.
I don't understand why it is not possible for DRI to support S3TC on
hardware that implements it. In this case the DRI wouldn't be
*implementing* S3TC, just handing over pre-compre
Ian Romanick wrote:
> Andy Ross wrote:
> > And there is no one involved with DRI with assets to pay such an
> > award anyway.
>
> Except all the distros.
How is that an argument against DRI implementing S3TC? If the
distribution vendors don't want to ship it because of liability
concerns, then th
: )))
FIRST MORTGAGE NETWORK
FMN
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:32:02AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Ian Romanick wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> > > And there is no one involved with DRI with assets to
> > > pay such an award anyway.
> >
> > Except all the distros
magenta wrote:
> But they're not transferring the license to others, they're just
> providing a reference implementation. nVidia themselves wouldn't be
> sued for it, but someone releasing new software using that
> implementation could be.
By that same logic, DRI can't be sued for providing the c
Thomas Dodd wrote:
Nicholas Leippe wrote:
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 11:20 pm, you wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 08:10:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You have to balance things out. Yes, the US is litiginous, and
clearly way
too much so. Is the answer to just cower in a hole and
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> > And there is no one involved with DRI with assets to
> > pay such an award anyway.
>
> Except all the distros.
I think that even wilful patent infringement only means "triple damages"
(p
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> magenta wrote:
> > You don't understand how patents work, do you? All of those people
> > (except OpenIL, anyway) have licensed the algorithm itself. The
> > algorithm is freely-available (it's even part of the patent
> > documents)
On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Andy Ross wrote:
> And there is no one involved with DRI with assets to
> pay such an award anyway.
Except all the distros.
--
Smile! http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990315.html
---
This SF.NET em
magenta wrote:
> You don't understand how patents work, do you? All of those people
> (except OpenIL, anyway) have licensed the algorithm itself. The
> algorithm is freely-available (it's even part of the patent
> documents). The problem is that S3 haven't released the patent to the
> public dom
Industry leader seeks entrepreneurs for national and
international market expansion. We have an immediate
need and are willing to train and develop even non-
experienced individuals in local and international
markets. Candidates must be self-motivated individuals
with the entrepreneurial drive
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
> >
> > By implementing S3TC without a patent license, the DRI team would be
> > opening the DRI project up for potential litigation.
>
> On the other hand, by being too timid, the DRI team can also eventually
> doom
Nicholas Leippe wrote:
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 11:20 pm, you wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 08:10:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You have to balance things out. Yes, the US is litiginous, and clearly way
too much so. Is the answer to just cower in a hole and hope it passes?
May
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, magenta wrote:
>
> Also, what about doing hardware-only support, and just breaking for
> software fallback? Then it'd be up to the hardware (which ostensibly has a
> license) to implement the algorithm.
That sounds like a good approach (and almost certainly acceptable for
g
Had to change my mail setup to get this to sf.net...
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
--- Begin Message ---
Currently, an arbitrary number of signals can be scheduled, potentiall
Title: BAÐIMSIZ ÇALIÞ - SINIRSIZ KAZAN
Sevgili Dost,
Sizinle baðlantý kurdum çünkü eðer aradýðým kiþiyseniz sahip olduðum þey
sizin için çok ciddi ve özel bir teklif olabilir.
Ýzninizle önce size kendimden ve iþimden bahsetmek istiyorum.
Sonra sizin için burada ne olduðundan bahs
On Wednesday 18 December 2002 11:20 pm, you wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 08:10:30PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > You have to balance things out. Yes, the US is litiginous, and clearly way
> > too much so. Is the answer to just cower in a hole and hope it passes?
> > Maybe. And maybe no
23 matches
Mail list logo
