Slashdot Mirror


Fedora's OpenGL Composite Desktop

An anonymous reader writes "First we had Novell's XGL and Compiz technology, which allows for OpenGL-based composite rendering on the Linux desktop. Now Fedora has created the Advanced Indirect GL X project, which aims for similar desktop effects but with a simpler implementation. Sure, at the end of the day it's just eye candy, but make no mistake - the Linux desktop is due for a massive shake-up!"

8 of 392 comments (clear)

  1. Re:There go the distros again.. by Erwos · · Score: 4, Informative

    Did you even RTFA? All the work was done upstream. Nothing's there that's Fedora specific.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  2. Re:There go the distros again.. by misleb · · Score: 4, Informative

    How is this an incompatible fork? According to the website, they're working with upstream X development to make this a part of or at least easily added to the regular X distribution. It's just that only FC5 has things setup just right so far.

    -matthew

    --
    "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
  3. Re:Not again by Erwos · · Score: 4, Informative

    Your nVidia video card doesn't support Aigl, you mean. It's missing an extension that nVidia is adding in the next driver release. This is hardly a show-stopper. Indeed, from the article, nVidia seems to believe this is the way to go.

    -Erwos

    --
    Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
  4. Comparison to Novell's XGL effort by anandrajan · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the FAQ, How is this different than XGL?

    "XGL is a different X server. This is a more incremental change which is slated to become part of Xorg. We don't believe that replacing the entire X server is the right path, and that improving it incrementally is a better way to modernize it. After talking to people at xdevconf, it felt like much of the upstream Xorg community shares this view. You can search Adam Jackson's notes for "large work for Xgl" to get the blow-by-blow or NVidia's presentation from XDevConf 2006 on using the existing model.

    We've been working on the AIGLX code for a some time with the community, which is in direct contrast with the way that XGL was developed. XGL spent the last few months of its development behind closed doors and was dropped on the community as a finished solution. Unfortunately, it wasn't peer reviewed during its development process, and its architecture doesn't sit well with a lot of people.

    The other question is Wait, can I use compiz? The answer there is a theoretical yes, although no one has actually gotten it to work. We love compiz and we think it's great stuff and is well polished, but it's often confused with the underlying architecture of XGL. Much like the code that we've added to metacity, compiz is a composite manager. With a bit of work, it should be possible to get compiz working on this X server. There's an excellent post from Soren on the topic of compiz vs. metacity."

    --
    Anand Rangarajan anand@cise.ufl.edu
  5. Re:"Just eyecandy" by ajs · · Score: 4, Informative
    Advantages of an OpenGL desktop:
    • Zooming in on any part of the desktop while still being able to interact with it (for the visually impared, this is HUGE)
    • Hardware support beomes much simpler.
    • Window manager interaction involves less CPU
    • SVG rendering can go straight to OpenGL for better rendering performance
    • Support for alpha blending (for PNG, anti-aliasing, gimp, etc.) is much lower overhead and easier to support universally

  6. Re:Not again by cortana · · Score: 4, Informative
    Please visit http://developer.nvidia.com/object/xdevconf_2006_p resentations.html and check out NVIDIA's presentation: "Using the Existing
    XFree86/X.Org Loadable Driver Framework to Achieve a Composited X Desktop":
    In this paper, we make the case for using the existing XFree86/X.Org DDX loadable driver framework to achieve a production-quality composited X desktop, as opposed to the X-on-OpenGL model. While the X-on-OpenGL model demonstrates what the graphics hardware is capable of, everything that the X-on-OpenGL model can achieve is equally possible with the current framework. Furthermore, the current framework offers flexibility to driver developers to expose vendor-specific features that may not be possible through the X-on-OpenGL model.
  7. WMP plays ogg in 2 1/2 easy steps by dstewart · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.illiminable.com/ogg/

    # Uninstall any previous version of these filters.(This is important!) Go to add remove programs, remove oggcodecs
    # Make sure media player or any directshow applications are closed.
    # Run the installer.

    Then Windows Media Player or any other directshow application (eg. BSPlayer) will be able to play Ogg Vorbis, Ogg Speex, Ogg Theora, Ogg FLAC and native FLAC."


    You're welcome.

    --
    Not every argument requires reduction to absurdity.
  8. Re:Xgl Already Better than Mac and Vista by be-fan · · Score: 4, Informative

    XGL isn't a rewrite of the server. It's a rewrite of the DDX (device-dependent) portion. That's probably the best part of the server to rewrite though, given the DIX (device-independent) is relatively clean code. XGL doesn't get rid of X's cruftiest part, though, which is xlib. XCB is ready to be a replacement, but GNOME won't be able to move to it until 3.x, because Xlib is implicitly a part of the GDK ABI.

    That said, I wouldn't say XGL is better than OS X yet. OS X can do the effects you listed, it just doesn't do a lot of them for asthetic reasons. Technically, I'd argue OS X's approach is superior to XGL's, since Quartz 2D Extreme uses a direct-rendering model as opposed to XGL's indirect model. Additionally, the fact that the compositor is seperate from the window server in XGL makes synchronization a much bigger PITA than in OS X. On the other hand, the indirect model allows the X server to access the geometry stream, which allows some effects the direct-rendering model doesn't. Technical merits aside, OS X still wins because its already a stable, mature, and widely used technology. It'll be awhile before XGL is as mature as Quartz (especially at the driver layer --- DRI is really not ready for XGL yet), and before GNOME/KDE apps use vector graphics as widely as OS X apps do.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...