If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
The GL ES 2.0 requirement is simply a requirement that the hardware supports programmable shaders.
That is a BIG fundamental requirement. Without that support, you may as well just stick to X, there is a ton of stuff that must be worked around, papered over, and emulated on the CPU.
For simplicity sake, that hardware will be abandoned going forward. You should either stick with legacy code (X) or upgrade your hardware.
Sorry, but hardware that crappy just isn't worth supporting with new code.
Just for a recap, when is Wayland expected to support accelerated OpenGL (not the ES kind, the full thing)?
I don't think anyone is planning that right now, although it wouldn't be hard. I think ES2 is basically a subset of GL2, which throws out all the legacy/fixed function parts.
The mesa drivers support ES2, and I think both NVidia and AMD do as well (or at least they have that ability for some of their drivers), so I'm not sure there will be any reason to support regular GL2, but if it becomes an issue I bet someone will fix it pretty quickly.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the problem was that libGL from Mesa was heavily tied to X, and cleaning that is quite an undertaking.
It just seems funny that people are complaining so vocally that OpenGL 4 apps don't run on Linux (there's 2 of them. TWO!), yet get excited about a system which does not support basically any existing native OpenGL software.
Comment