interpreting glxinfo's output
andrew.r.rader at gmail.com
Wed Mar 26 17:19:16 PDT 2008
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Dan Nicholson <dbn.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:13 PM, andrew rader <andrew.r.rader at gmail.com> wrote:
> > thanks for the fast reply,
> > that does indeed answer my question, with one additional question. The
> > last post has the general extension list described:
> > "general: and that's the resulting supported GLX extensions, depending
> > what the server and client sides support."
> > would it be better to just say "general is a list of the extensions
> > that the driver supports"? since both the client and server (in my
> > case) support TFP, but "general" doesn't, is it the driver that is
> > missing this extension?
> Actually, it's all three (this just came up the other day): client and
> server both handle the protocol and the driver implements it.
ah ok, so in my case the server/client are both saying "we can support
drivers that provide the TFP extension" but my driver doesn't support
it, so I can't use it (unless I use indirect method mentioned
does LIBGL_ALWAYS_INDIRECT=1 cause a different driver to be used, one
that does implement TFP?
More information about the xorg