Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

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

  • Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

    Phoronix: Glamor Project Is Called To Be Merged Into X.Org Server

    Glamor, an open-source project that up until now has received little community attention or public acknowledgement outside of its small development group, has now been called to be merged into the X.Org Server. But what is Glamor?..

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTk0OA

  • #2
    ismell a new benchmark article sometime soon

    Comment


    • #3
      sound like worse analogue of Xorg/XA and that looks like because Intel just can't play with everyone else: DRI1 vs DRI2, GEM vs TTM, UXA/SNA vs EXA, now this crap against Xorg state tracker that were around for quite some time.
      they almost have their own separate graphic stack by now.

      rumour has it that they will finally abandon MeeGo in favour of Android soon.
      everything Intel does turns out to be half-baked and then dies as soon as it looses interest in it, OSS or not, like someone there always struggles to do some good shit but it comes out weird.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yep, that's the feel I get too. Re-inventing things just for Intel.

        Of course it's Intel's decision and hours to do so...

        Comment


        • #5
          Intel: it's too much work to rewrite our driver to use Gallium

          So instead, we'll rewrite half the entire graphics stack to work with our drivers only.

          Yeah, that's the ticket.

          Comment


          • #6
            That kind of stuff is reason enough for me to stay away from Intel hardware.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
              So instead, we'll rewrite half the entire graphics stack to work with our drivers only.

              Yeah, that's the ticket.
              Remember that both ATI and Nvidia have done just as much rewriting for their binary blob drivers, its just that Intel happens to open source their work.

              I wonder how much of the Intel stuff is done the way it is so that Intel can share code with their Windows drivers (I know that AMD and Nvidia share a lot of code with the Windows drivers)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by jonwil View Post
                Remember that both ATI and Nvidia have done just as much rewriting for their binary blob drivers, its just that Intel happens to open source their work.

                I wonder how much of the Intel stuff is done the way it is so that Intel can share code with their Windows drivers (I know that AMD and Nvidia share a lot of code with the Windows drivers)
                As far as I know, Intel keeps it's Linux and Windows drivers teams completely separated for legal reasons, to the point that they aren't even allowed to attend the same meetings. So that no one can complain the Linux driver is based on code Intel has licensed for it's windows driver.

                That's somewhat old information so maybe things have changed, but I don't think so.


                And of course AMD/NVidia have to rewrite lots of code, because of the licensing issue. Intel's drivers don't require that and they still do it. That's why it's so disappointing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Intel's linux and mac drivers have hugely better quality than their windows drivers (in opengl, of course). That alone speaks that all three have separate teams.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X