From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 21:49:46 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/8] package/glmark2: gl support also depends on X.org In-Reply-To: <5721153E.6040608@free-electrons.com> References: <1461586822-1003-1-git-send-email-bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> <1461586822-1003-2-git-send-email-bernd.kuhls@t-online.de> <20160427213230.0ee9fe71@free-electrons.com> <5721153E.6040608@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20160427214946.2e9dcb25@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Wed, 27 Apr 2016 16:38:38 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > I'm fine with nitpicking, however we already use > BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D_OPENGL_EGL and BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D_OPENGL_ES in > glmark2 and weston, which could also ostensibly be replaced by the more > verbose conditional. I don't feel super strongly about using BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D_OPENGL_GL vs. BR2_PACKAGE_HAS_LIBGL && BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D. The former is admittedly shorter. > Granted, for weston what it really wants is wayland-egl, which AFAIK > with our current packages is only provided by mesa3d. Not sure what you mean here. Do you mean we should have a BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D_WAYLAND_EGL blind option? > Also while nitpicking the xorg drivers only want DRI so we can keep that > as is since the xorg conditional is in there already (packages in x11r7/ > already depend on xorg, plus mesa3d_dri gives opengl). Kind of a maybe > take back my ACKs for the drivers. Hum, yes for the X.org drivers, I don't see why the patches are needed indeed. Unless Bernd disagrees, I will mark patches 5, 6, 7 and 8 as Rejected. Bernd, can you respin patches 1, 2, 3 and 4 to take into account the comments Gustavo and I made (as well as include the Acked-by from Gustavo on patches 2, 3 and 4) ? Thanks a lot! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com