On 18 August 2010 19:25, Andrea Crotti <andrea.crotti.0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Alexander Duscheleit <jinks@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> direct rendering is always "Yes" these days, because mesa includes a >> software render which makes you CPU do all the work. >> >> try: glxinfo | grep "^OpenGL" >> >> here's what I get on my Intel Laptop: >> OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc >> OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 945GM GEM 20100328 2010Q1 >> x86/MMX/SSE2 OpenGL version string: 1.4 Mesa 7.8.2 >> >> and here's what you SHOULDN'T get (from a VM with cirrus-vga): >> jinks@edultsp:~$ glxinfo | grep direct >> direct rendering: Yes >> >> jinks@edultsp:~$ glxinfo | grep OpenGL >> OpenGL vendor string: Mesa Project >> OpenGL renderer string: Software Rasterizer >> OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.7.1 >> OpenGL shading language version string: 1.20 >> >> (Note, that it still supports direct rendering, but uses the Software >> Rasterizer.) > > > So then yes it doesn't work as expected. > Following the guide online in theory it should work also with hal and > dbus running (with intel-dri). > > Maybe I'll try a xorg.conf to see if it works or not, if anyone has one > working with 3D for a dell mini it would be great... > Thanks > > I got a hold of the AspireOne. Plugged in my Arch-on-a-Stick and BAM! 3D is DEAD. Or, dying. I'm giving up on this as a regression of intel/mesa, because some months ago this same netbook played UrbanTerror on Ubuntu Netbook Remix. I can't test it on that again, because I see that the owner has rerwritten the disk with Windows 7. God bless the Linux Intel GFX developers. -- GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
