Hi!
Again me concerning the X Server...
I had yesteday a "critical" discussion concerning the LinuxPPC Version of Sin.
It ended in the question "Do we want to delay the release of the Linux-x86
version because of the LinuxPPC version ?" All present people agreed with "No"
(including myselves). At the end I was asked - which I can of course not
answer, so I am asking for it - "At what *likely* timeframe would be the
problems in the LinuxPPC X Server being fixed, at least as much problems
fixed, that Sin it at least USABLE on LinuxPPC?"
We are not yet completely finished with the coding of Sin, but we are VERY
close to finishing it. And on that meeting was decided "no delaying of the
release". Of course even if Sin for LinuxPPC falls through there is still the
option to release Shogo or other future Linux titles of us for LinuxPPC also.
But I would like to release also Sin for LinuxPPC, as it is the project I am
working on it, and I am the biggest promotor of LinuxPPC in our company...
It might still happen... but what would really help me in my argumentation in
the company to put the LinuxPPC executable "on" would be:
- A bugfix so that Fullscreen 640x480
works
- A likely timeframe for first 3D Drivers
to be released, which optimally should
not be more than 3 months from now
When is the next Beta for the X Server likely to happen, BTW ?
Knowing a likely timeframe would help my argumentation a lot... especially if
that timeframe is not TOO far away in the future...
Steffen
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
What bug? What is not working for you? On what hardware? For both
hardware I own (control and matrox), it is working just fine.
quoted hunk
- A likely timeframe for first 3D Drivers to be released, which optimally should not be more than 3 months from now
Again, what is not working for you? What have you tried to get them
working for you and how did it fair?
Takashi Oe
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
What bug? What is not working for you? On what hardware? For both
hardware I own (control and matrox), it is working just fine.
If I use VidModeExtension at first modes which are entered in XF86Config
are entered as 640x481 (but this is of course a minor problem and can be
workarounded). The big problem is that the Screen is totally messed up, looks
to me as if the Bytes_Per_Line are not correct. With 1024x768 it works
correct, but with no other resolutions (and 1024x768 is too slow for the
software renderer of the game, I need 640x480). The Hardware is a
"Blue/White" G3 Mac 1st Revision with (naturally) ATI Rage Graphics
Hardware. I am using the ATI Rage Driver.
quoted
- A likely timeframe for first 3D Drivers to be released, which optimally should not be more than 3 months from now
Again, what is not working for you? What have you tried to get them
working for you and how did it fair?
I cannot try getting something to work what does not exist. And appearently
there are no GLX- or DRI-Drivers for ATI Rage (or any other hardware) yet.
I am talking about Hardware Accelerated Mesa3D here...
Steffen
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
If I use VidModeExtension at first modes which are entered in XF86Config
are entered as 640x481 (but this is of course a minor problem and can be
workarounded). The big problem is that the Screen is totally messed up, looks
to me as if the Bytes_Per_Line are not correct. With 1024x768 it works
correct, but with no other resolutions (and 1024x768 is too slow for the
software renderer of the game, I need 640x480). The Hardware is a
"Blue/White" G3 Mac 1st Revision with (naturally) ATI Rage Graphics
Hardware. I am using the ATI Rage Driver.
As I said, it works on matrox and control, your problem is specific to ati
support on XF4 (I presume). Use XF68_FBDev or go bug Ani Joshi or have a
look at the source yourself. You may be busy at doing your stuff, but
someone with the hardware and interest like you needs to look at this kind
of things. I hardly think this is a major bug which should hold up a
release of an user app.
quoted
quoted
- A likely timeframe for first 3D Drivers to be released, which optimally should not be more than 3 months from now
quoted
Again, what is not working for you? What have you tried to get them
working for you and how did it fair?
I cannot try getting something to work what does not exist. And appearently
there are no GLX- or DRI-Drivers for ATI Rage (or any other hardware) yet.
I am talking about Hardware Accelerated Mesa3D here...
Ok, you should say so (3D support for older video cards like ATI Rage) in
your previous message then. As you may know, DRI drivers already exist
for mga, r128, tdfx, i810 in source form.
Takashi Oe
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
As I said, it works on matrox and control, your problem is specific to ati
Well, ATI is the hardware you get when you buy a Mac today. So it is the
most important thing.
support on XF4 (I presume). Use XF68_FBDev or go bug Ani Joshi or have a
look at the source yourself. You may be busy at doing your stuff, but
I was told it is a known problem. (No, I do not have the time to look at it
myselves).
someone with the hardware and interest like you needs to look at this kind
of things. I hardly think this is a major bug which should hold up a
release of an user app.
Well, if it is not fixed it most likely WILL hold up...
Ok, you should say so (3D support for older video cards like ATI Rage) in
I meant ATI Rage 128 of course :) It is just my interest about 3D support for
the Boards you will get if you buy a G3 or G4 Mac today (which will be
ATI Rage 128 or ATI Rage Pro, depending on system).
your previous message then. As you may know, DRI drivers already exist
for mga, r128, tdfx, i810 in source form.
Hmmm... I was told that no DRI Drivers would exist even for r128 ... can you
point me to a place where I can get this ? And if they exist in Source form,
someone has them already in Binary form maybe ?
Steffen
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
support on XF4 (I presume). Use XF68_FBDev or go bug Ani Joshi or have a
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[...]
(No, I do not have the time to look at it
myselves).
That's too bad. I bet this problem of yours won't take you more than a
few hours to spot it; that is, if it's not fixed already.
quoted
someone with the hardware and interest like you needs to look at this kind
of things. I hardly think this is a major bug which should hold up a
release of an user app.
Well, if it is not fixed it most likely WILL hold up...
What's wrong with XF68_FBDev?
quoted
Ok, you should say so (3D support for older video cards like ATI Rage) in
I meant ATI Rage 128 of course :) It is just my interest about 3D support for
the Boards you will get if you buy a G3 or G4 Mac today (which will be
ATI Rage 128 or ATI Rage Pro, depending on system).
quoted
your previous message then. As you may know, DRI drivers already exist
for mga, r128, tdfx, i810 in source form.
Hmmm... I was told that no DRI Drivers would exist even for r128 ... can you
point me to a place where I can get this ? And if they exist in Source form,
someone has them already in Binary form maybe ?
www.xfree86.org
4.0.1 has them.
Takashi Oe
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
Well, if it is not fixed it most likely WILL hold up...
What's wrong with XF68_FBDev?
Hmmm... I was told to use the ATI thing... did not think this was only a thing
related to the ATI Driver... but maybe I should try this.
quoted
Hmmm... I was told that no DRI Drivers would exist even for r128 ... can
you
quoted
point me to a place where I can get this ? And if they exist in Source
form,
quoted
someone has them already in Binary form maybe ?
www.xfree86.org
4.0.1 has them.
Hmmm... I looked on the site, but could only see versions for x86 and Alpha
there,
not for PPC... has anybody TRIED this stuff (source) on PPC yet ?
I really do not have the time to try around with untried stuff...
*Has* anybody tried compiling this 4.0.1 version on PPC? Does it work ? Are
there
any problems ? Is a Binary Version available anywhere ?
Steffen
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: Pierre Phaneuf <hidden> Date: 2000-08-01 20:54:26
Steffen Haeuser wrote:
It might still happen... but what would really help me in my
argumentation in the company to put the LinuxPPC executable "on"
would be:
- A bugfix so that Fullscreen 640x480
works
- A likely timeframe for first 3D Drivers
to be released, which optimally should
not be more than 3 months from now
When is the next Beta for the X Server likely to happen, BTW ?
Why do you wait for those bugfix? These are in the server, so if your
code is correct, you could just put it up and make it available, so that
when the X server is fixed, Sin will just work.
In any case, you could make a binary available on your web site later
on, no (a "patch" if you will)?
--
"We aim to make simple things simple and complex things possible."
-- Alan Kay (on Smalltalk)
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
Why do you wait for those bugfix? These are in the server, so if your
code is correct, you could just put it up and make it available, so that
when the X server is fixed, Sin will just work.
For myselves this would be okay, but it is possible that other people involved
would not agree. Still, the 640x480 bug is now fixed, as I was informed, so
at least this is no problem anymore. And hopefully DRI Drivers will come not
to
far in the future. After this recent developement I think it is quite likely
that we will put a PPC Binary on the CDs of the game(s).
Steffen
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/