Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Legacy Mesa Drivers Receive Their Death Sentence

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Kivada View Post
    While that may be the case many coders make it sound like these kinds of things can be kept going in less then 5 lines of code that they could do in their sleep, if that is in fact the case then how much time could it possibly take them just keep gimping it along?

    It's almost as bad as the coder that wanted to drop support for the ISA bus, when tons of devices in current gen hardware still uses it.

    Maybe they can't possibly fathom why someone would be using old hardware, perhaps they've forgotten that the vast majority of people out there that are using a computer are using one that is more then 5 years old, that Linux has long been the champion of old tech users since Windows EOLs and newer versions run like crap on old hardware.

    I thought the game plan was to gain more market share, so as to make these OSS coder's skills more in demand allowing them to ask for more money when being picked up by an Intel or AMD. Isn't that the end goal? To get paid to write OSS code?
    Again, if you're holding old (very) hardware, you're either using old, long-term-support Linux distribution (desktop) or server (in which case, vesa should work just fine).
    In the end, the Mesa devs needs to decide where their collective resources are better spent: Maintaining old (very, very) old hardware or better supporting new hardware.
    Needless to say which one gets my vote.

    However, again, if you really, really need old hardware support, why don't *you* do something about it?

    - Gilboa
    DEV: Intel S2600C0, 2xE52658V2, 32GB, 4x2TB + 2x3TB, GTX780, F21/x86_64, Dell U2711.
    SRV: Intel S5520SC, 2xX5680, 36GB, 4x2TB, GTX550, F21/x86_64, Dell U2412..
    BACK: Tyan Tempest i5400XT, 2xE5335, 8GB, 3x1.5TB, 9800GTX, F21/x86-64.
    LAP: ASUS N56VJ, i7-3630QM, 16GB, 1TB, 635M, F21/x86_64.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Kivada View Post
      While that may be the case many coders make it sound like these kinds of things can be kept going in less then 5 lines of code that they could do in their sleep, if that is in fact the case then how much time could it possibly take them just keep gimping it along?
      That's NOT the case here. They've been gimping these drivers along for a long time, and it's finally come to the point where it's beginning to take a significant amount of work to keep them going. Therefore, the decision was made that the effort wasn't worth the result - if you'd like to take over this work, I'm sure they would be happy to let you. Most of the developers don't even have access to the hardware anymore, which makes it pretty difficult maintain when you can't tell if the change you made caused any problems.

      Maybe they can't possibly fathom why someone would be using old hardware, perhaps they've forgotten that the vast majority of people out there that are using a computer are using one that is more then 5 years old, that Linux has long been the champion of old tech users since Windows EOLs and newer versions run like crap on old hardware.
      We're talking more like over 10 year old computers here. The "vast majority" of users DO NOT use these drivers, not even close. We're talking sub 1%, probably sub .1%. In fact, it's quite possible some of these drivers being removed don't even work, and that we just don't know about it because no one has tried using them and complained about it. The GLDirect support didn't even compile anymore (it was a GL -> DirectX 7 converter that got deleted).

      I thought the game plan was to gain more market share, so as to make these OSS coder's skills more in demand allowing them to ask for more money when being picked up by an Intel or AMD. Isn't that the end goal? To get paid to write OSS code?
      I think there is only a handful of developers working on the graphics stack that aren't already employed by someone, which means they are driven mostly by what those companies want. Which is, better support for current hardware and future hardware, with less importance being placed on hardware > 10 years old. The handful that aren't employed are too busy working on other stuff, and don't have much interest in working on code that might benefit a couple of thousand people worldwide when they could instead work on code that will benefit millions.

      Comment

      Working...
      X