From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Le Bihan Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:20:32 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4 1/5] mesa3d: pull out from x11 In-Reply-To: <20140310173941.GA3282@free.fr> References: <20140310173941.GA3282@free.fr> Message-ID: <20140310182030.GB18832@pc-eric> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Yann E., All On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 06:39:41PM +0100, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > > diff --git a/package/Config.in b/package/Config.in > > index 70e5a7f..b0da653 100644 > > --- a/package/Config.in > > +++ b/package/Config.in > > @@ -188,6 +188,7 @@ source "package/fbv/Config.in" > > source "package/imagemagick/Config.in" > > source "package/linux-fusion/Config.in" > > source "package/lite/Config.in" > > +source "package/mesa3d/Config.in" > > If I understand correctly, mesa3d is an implementation of OpenGL. So, > *maybe* it would make sense to move it along the other OpenGL packages, > into package/opengl/. Some quick thoughts: 1. As Mesa3D is an implementation of OpenGL, it will be a provider for the virtual packages libegl, libgles and libopenvg. 2. Mesa3D also provides libgl, but: - no package in Buildroot requires full OpenGL. - Buildroot is unlikely to include packages for AMD/NVidia/Intel drivers (providers for libgl). So there is no need for a libgl virtual package. 3. IMHO package/opengl should only contain the definitions of the virtual packages, not the providers (otherwise sunxi-mali should be moved to package/opengl too!). Best regards, ELB