Has anyone ever considered developing code to allow use of OpenGL without using X-Windows? I suppose that this would require either a modified glx or a stubbed out X-server so that one could continue to use closed source glx libs (nvidia). I took a look at libglx and it does not reference too many X calls but have yet to have time to dig around in the XFree86 code to see where this would lead.
The reason I am interested in this is X takes up too much memory and all I need to do is OpenGL fullscreen. I do not need windows etc. etc.
Anyway, has anyone ever heard of such a “glXfaker” or would anyone be interested in looking into it with me?
| modified glx or a stubbed out X-server so that one could continue to
| use closed source glx libs (nvidia). I took a look at libglx and it
You’d have a problem with the NVIDIA stuff, they provide you with an X
server that does the 3D acceleration. You’d have to fake the rest of X
sufficiently to get it running.
Maybe you could abuse nano-X a little?On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 10:54:31AM -0700, Scott A. Friedman wrote:
Has anyone ever considered developing code to allow use of OpenGL without using X-Windows? I suppose that this would require either a modified glx or a stubbed out X-server so that one could continue to use closed source glx libs (nvidia). I took a look at libglx and it does not reference too many X calls but have yet to have time to dig around in the XFree86 code to see where this would lead.
The reason I am interested in this is X takes up too much memory and all I need to do is OpenGL fullscreen. I do not need windows etc. etc.
Anyway, has anyone ever heard of such a “glXfaker” or would anyone be interested in looking into it with me?
Just curios, what do you consider to be to much memory? On my machine,
after subtracting the size of the frame buffer from the process size I
find that X is, to me, very small.