[quake2] Quake 0.16 rc2...
danfe at nsu.ru
Mon Sep 20 22:10:20 EDT 2004
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 10:15:06PM +0200, Vincent Cojot wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004, Thomas J Fogal wrote:
> >I've just recently started following this list, but GLX sounds like a
> >real hassle. Is there really any reason to keep it around? Isn't all
> >this portable-input stuff SDL's job?
> >Just my $0.02...
> Well GLX is pretty much the only renderer available on Linux. Even SDL-GL
> uses GLX as a backend on Linux when it's available. Furthermore, other
> platforms (Solaris, IRIX) are mostly GLX-only since SDL-GL results on
> these platforms are less than satisfactory so don't drop GLX too fast.. :)
I would also point out that GLX is pretty much standard way of doing 3D
stuff in X11. There's no intermediate level such as SDL, which (apart
from being friendly to several platforms only), might be less robust than
raw GLX speed IMHO. Moreover, SDL is a additional dependency. Unix suffers
from excessive dependencies enough already, so it's generally good when
one pushes the number down.
More information about the quake2