> * 2. What kind of acceleration features are available on the SGI
> * machines? The X11R6 server has hooks for different set of
> * features, so for example, bitblit can be easily hacked into the X
> * server.
> * But I imagine the SGI has more acceleration features that I can
> * dream of.
> The problem is that (I think) we have so many graphics cards that its done
> differently in every one (some cards are simple frame buffers (8/24bit), then
> there are some with multiple GE, oh and we also have extra visuals for overlay
> and pop-ups.
What does "multiple GE" stand for?
Supporting a wide variety of devices in X11R6 should be quite easy.
This X server also can support multiple visuals on a display, so this
should be easy to hack on as well.
> * I looked yesterday at a program called glxinfo, which led me to
> * believe that applications may have some of the GL code linked in
> * trough the libraries and the other part resides on the X server.
> Both :-) We don't do things the way easy here.
So OpenGL applications can run without an X server, or they have code
to bypass the X server if they need to?
> The is a GLX extension in the X server which allows GL to run in an X window.
> There is also I think a DSO that holds the hardware specific GL calls.
Sorry, but what does DSO stand for?
> To me the quickest (and the best) way of getting an X server would be if we
> could simply port the existing Irix X server to Linux/SGI. My suggestion would
> be, now that we have backing for hardware to get official backing for
> I don't think we should neccesarrily release the source code for the ddx part
> of the X server to the public, but we should at least be able to get backing
> release .o files so the user could re-link the X server if they needed to (Sun
> have done this before).
Ok. This sound good enough.