[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       dri-devel
Subject:    Re: [Dri-devel] Information request
From:       Joseph Carter <knghtbrd () debian ! org>
Date:       2001-03-29 18:36:09
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 07:35:14PM +0530, Damarugendra M wrote:
> that is i want to run this app from the console.
> this app may be a game or whatever. it should not be 
> run on X or it should not be linked to any X librarys.
> It may use OpenGL for graphics.

I've got nothing but bad news for you if your heart's set against using
X..  You possibly could write an interface to the kernel's drm that didn't
use X, but if you did you'd find that drm is still evolving.  On top of
that, you'd have to essentially reimplement the X chipset drivers to be
able to use it.  So while this is technically possible, it's practically
not.

The best way to get graphics working without X was GGI.  More bad news
there as the GGI project set out with very ambitious goals which most
people never thought they'd accomplish.  By the time they had demonstrated
they could deliver, they and their more vocal supporters seemed to manage
to irk just about everyone they needed to convince of KGI's benefits.  As
a result, they've marginalised themselves to the point of insignificance.

There is still libggi, and there is a (not very well maintained) Mesa
target, but the Mesa target is unaccellerated, their support among kernel
people is virtually nil at this point, and the kernel-implemented
alternative is the still-experimental framebuffer drivers (slow, buggy,
and did I mention slow?)  This makes libggi just one more 2D helper
library for writing X apps.  SDL does the same job (not quite as fast) and
supports accellerated OpenGL under X.

As with all other forms of unix in use today, graphics in Linux means X.
You can write your app for SDL an get a lot more portability to lesser
platforms like those from Redmond as well as the non-X Linux targets, but
you won't get accellerated OpenGL without X and you're going to be
disappointed trying to use a framebuffer without KGI.  (KGI has its own
problems as well, but the problem it doesn't have is being slow..)

If performance is an issue, stick with X.  Despite everything I've said
this past week about it (mostly related to this damned Radeon), it is the
most stable and highest performance solution.

-- 
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>                Free software developer

<Overfiend> partycle: I seriously do need a vacation from this package. 
            I actually had a DREAM about introducing a stupid new bug
            into xbase-preinst last night.  That's a Bad Sign.


[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]