From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yann E. MORIN Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:41:19 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v4 1/5] mesa3d: pull out from x11 In-Reply-To: <20140310182030.GB18832@pc-eric> References: <20140310173941.GA3282@free.fr> <20140310182030.GB18832@pc-eric> Message-ID: <20140310184119.GC3282@free.fr> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Eric, All, On 2014-03-10 19:20 +0100, Eric Le Bihan spake thusly: > 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. I've looked on my distro, and mesa3d does not provide any file named libegl*.so or ligles*.so or libopenvg*.so. So I don't think it should be, *as is*, a provider for libegl, libgles or libopenvg. > 2. Mesa3D also provides libgl, but: libgl or libglx ? On my distro (Ubuntu 13.10), there's no libgl.so, only libglx.so which is provided by a bumch of different packages, of which the nvidia blobs. All I have that looks to be from mesa3d if libglapi.so. > - no package in Buildroot requires full OpenGL. > - Buildroot is unlikely to include packages for AMD/NVidia/Intel drivers > (providers for libgl). Unlikely, but what about a powerfull, game-console-class device using a NVidia (or Intel, AMD) GPU? > So there is no need for a libgl virtual package. Indeed, so no need to provide a virtul package for that as long as we do not have a real user. It will always be time to add it later. And it's not like it would be rocket-science to do it! :-) > 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!). Yes, I already replied to Bernd in this direction: mesa3d treads on the provider side. So like other GL providers, it does not really belong to package/opengl. Regards, Yann E. MORIN. -- .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: | | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ | | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no | | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'