Open-Source Mesa 3D Library/Drivers Now Support OpenGL 4 30
An anonymous reader writes: The Mesa 3D project that is the basis of the open-source Linux/BSD graphics drivers now supports OpenGL 4.0 and most of OpenGL 4.1~4.2. The OpenGL 4.0 enablement code landed in Mesa Git yesterday/today and more GL 4.1/4.2 patches are currently being reviewed for the Intel, Radeon, and Nouveau open-source GPU drivers.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm suuurre yours fitted without problem.
Cheers,
Your optometrist.
Re: (Score:1)
Meeh. It's not necessarily him. sexconker said [slashdot.org] that he threw some cow comments in the mix just for the laughs. The original spammer is probably some other person. sexconker seems like a sane person to me.
Hey, at least the weird BSD spam seems to be gone for good (the one with random words and the word "BSD" there somewhere).
Most? (Score:3, Informative)
Not only does core Mesa support most of 4.1-4.2, they support most of 4.3-4.5. The problem is every few generations of OpenGL there is a developer intensive extension to get in. Compute Shader in 4.3 it probably the next monster they are going to get stuck at.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hard to say as it is not fully released yet. Valve has a version targeting intel that they said would be released when the spec is. Depending how complete it is it could be done on release.
Re:Most? (Score:5, Interesting)
4.1 is nothing to be ashamed of. ES 2.0 compatibility is the elephant in that room. Program binaries, per-stage programs and multiple viewports are all worth the price of admission (free)
Cool, So How Can I Use It? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
OpenGL and OpenGL ES are different.
You can view ES as a "purified" form of OpenGL. Though it came into being as a superset of a subset, these days it tracks a pragmatic subset of OGL very well. It's not an exaggeration to call ES a triumph of cooperation between developers, industry and the standards organization.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't, since GLES40 doesn't exist.
Re: (Score:2)
ES 3.1 is current, you don't go higher than that for the time being. OpenGL 4.1 has "full compatibility with OpenGL ES 3.0 APIs", which I interpret as "strict superset", and 4.3 has the same relationship with ES 3.1. Additionally, a shim is available [wikipedia.org] to provide.
Wikipedia covers this here [wikipedia.org] and here. [wikipedia.org] Keep abreast of how Mesa is coming along here. [mesamatrix.net]
Or just keep reading those Phoronix [phoronix.com] articles.
Re: (Score:2)
...a shim [wikipedia.org] is available to provide ES with OpenGL compatibility, apparently all the way through to OGL 4.5. Not sure what ES versions are currently supported, it looks like ES 2. No data on how well this works. The primary purpose would appear to be, to help you be lazy with OpenGL ports. Better to write to the natively supported OGL subset, which will serve your project well for the future. Not to denigrate the value of Regal - no doubt it is a godsend for someone.
Staying 5 years behind... (Score:2)
Mesa has been about 5 years behind OpenGL, seems this follows the trend, not sure if that's a good or a bad thing. After all it's not falling behind but it really doesn't seem to be closing any gaps either. So 4.0 is DirectX11 generation hardware, CodeWeavers have said they hope to have DX11 support in WINE within a year. That would be nice, several games I play that are no-go in WINE and would be at least one obstacle in going back to Linux.
Re: (Score:2)
Mesa has been about 5 years behind OpenGL, seems this follows the trend, not sure if that's a good or a bad thing.
How about: good and bad, mostly good. I find that Mesa is really nice to work with. I have one project that has tracked it all the way from OGL 1.1 to 10.5 as of today, with nary a bump on the road. From time to time I have needed to mess with extensions in order to "tunnel" through to OpenGL versions still not fully supported by Mesa, but this has been a relatively painless process. Never once did I old code break, even with a bunch of ARBs bolted on. I wish all libraries were as nice to work with as Mesa.
Re: Staying 5 years behind... (Score:2, Informative)
Mesa IS the native driver for Intel. Mesa has some software reference drivers, but it isn't supposed to be relegated to reference status only. If it was, they're doing it wrong, because reference platforms should come early, not years after the production drivers have had versions EOL with a higher level of support.