Re: XFree86 5.0 TODO

> [Original Message]
> From: Mark Vojkovich <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Date: 3/21/2003 3:55:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [forum] XFree86 5.0 TODO
>
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Kendall Bennett wrote:
>
> > Mark Vojkovich <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > > If you kill it, make sure you replace it with something that will
provide 
> > > > equivalent functionality. Games and applications that wish to use 
> > > > fullscreen graphics under X11 can utilise DGA today, but if you
kill it, 
> > > > you lose that ability. DGA is the closest thing that XFree86 has to 
> > > > DirectX, but it could be *way* better.
> > > 
> > >     The problem IS the functionality.  That functionality is
> > > unsafe and should go away.  There aren't many apps that use DGA in
> > > a legitimate way, and those that do should be seeking alternatives.
> > 
> > What particular functionality do you believe is unsafe? More 
> > particularly, if you believe it is unsafe, should we design a 'better' 
> > DGA style interface for fullscreen applications that can be safe? Once 
> > you have a safe replacement for DGA, then kill it off.
>
>    I believe direct framebuffer access by clients to be unsafe.
> Part of this is because it can never have exclusive access to
> this hardware.  The server can VT switch away and you'll be
> writing over the framebuffer of another server.  At least in
> the case of NVIDIA hardware

Why do you capitalize nVidia?

Georgina