Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 14:19:29 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: terry@lambert.org, luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, james@miller.cs.uwm.edu, dufault@hda.com, hackers@freebsd.org, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, multimedia@rah.star-gate.com Subject: Re: Amancio's tv program with capture! Message-ID: <199601282119.OAA01470@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <24115.822812401@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 27, 96 11:00:01 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > BTW, the server doesn't use pixmaps with the shared memory extension. > > > It uses XImages. > > > > You can't avoid having to do the conversion. > > I understand that - I simply wanted to make the point that it wasn't > pixmap information being "wired", but XImage information. Check the > X11 protocol spec - there's a predefined low-level data type for > XImages (and Pixmaps are only passed by integer ID anyway). I realize the intended format of the shared memory region that the server will access. I don't believe that the mapped capture card memory can be made to resemble the region except for very special cards. As Amancio points out, a bus mastering frame grabber gould utilize DGA to write video card memory, with a lot of caveats. Personally, I'd like to see it eating an extra copy and working on all hardware rather than using DGA and working on 1/10th of all hardware. Not that I have an mbone connection anyway. 8-(. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199601282119.OAA01470>