| |||||||||||||
Getting rid of the bits of architecture Intel didn't designGetting rid of the bits of architecture Intel didn't designPosted Apr 26, 2009 16:59 UTC (Sun) by wilreichert (subscriber, #17680)In reply to: Getting rid of the bits of architecture Intel didn't design by jensend Parent article: Packard on the state of Linux graphics
Intel is driving the decisions here because they're the ones paying salary to xorg developers. Sure AMD is releasing hardware specs, but how many full time open source xorg develpers have they hired to work on their hardware support? None that I'm aware of, its the distros like Redhat & SUSE doing it for them. That said, I think the Intel paid developers are considering the needs of the other video cards when these APIs are created, no one will benefit if this stuff only works on one brand of card.
(Log in to post comments)
Getting rid of the bits of architecture Intel didn't design Posted Apr 27, 2009 4:01 UTC (Mon) by airlied (subscriber, #9104) [Link]
that would be 3 full-time AMD open source developers.
They are mainly concentrating on getting initial working 3D code for the current batch of chips at least useable before going ahead with getting the other bits.
Getting rid of the bits of architecture Intel didn't design Posted Apr 27, 2009 4:36 UTC (Mon) by wilreichert (subscriber, #17680) [Link]
Excellent, I'm thrilled to be wrong here. Perhaps its a problem of perception then - one doesn't see too many @amd.com emails on the xorg / mesa mailing lists.
|
|||||||||||||