From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2827198005 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 16:29:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 17364E05D7; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 16:29:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.182]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36F35E0262 for ; Mon, 4 Mar 2013 16:29:06 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFMCoOa/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEATocKAsLIRMSDwUlN4gLBsEtjWGCSGEDiGGFHYgOhX6IcIFegxU X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFMCoOa/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEATocKAsLIRMSDwUlN4gLBsEtjWGCSGEDiGGFHYgOhX6IcIFegxU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="2985677" Received: from 76-10-131-154.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([76.10.131.154]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with SMTP; 04 Mar 2013 11:29:02 -0500 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 04 Mar 2013 11:28:50 -0500 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:28:50 -0500 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted: x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers Message-ID: <20130304162850.GA20808@waltdnes.org> References: <51341977.8040105@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51341977.8040105@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: b1d42ca4-7d9b-46e1-b56a-34f87edeca30 X-Archives-Hash: dfdb810ef9045f7523e3ad7f29ac72c5 On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 10:48:07PM -0500, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote > I am sorry that this package has been such a headache for you, > unfortunately binary drivers (especially) are often like that. Thanks > for all your hard work keeping this usable. I'm not a C programmer, let alone a developer, so this may be a stupid question, but here goes... has anyone ever tried doing a HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) to present a reasonably stable interface to binary video drivers? Think of it as a shim translating a "pseudo-API" into "the real API" that the kernel exposes directly. Surely, we can do better than VESA. Give drivers 2 options... 1) direct kernel access like now 2) access via the HAL/shim -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications