From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 19:14:42 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 4/4] package/efl: add Evas GL DRM Engine support In-Reply-To: <1473282523-12796-4-git-send-email-romain.naour@gmail.com> References: <1473282523-12796-1-git-send-email-romain.naour@gmail.com> <1473282523-12796-4-git-send-email-romain.naour@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20160917191442.7ea32f90@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, 7 Sep 2016 23:08:43 +0200, Romain Naour wrote: > diff --git a/package/efl/Config.in b/package/efl/Config.in > index 6171b29..c6c26d8 100644 > --- a/package/efl/Config.in > +++ b/package/efl/Config.in > @@ -208,6 +208,16 @@ comment "Evas DRM Engine needs mesa3d w/ EGL support, threads" > depends on !BR2_TOOLCHAIN_HAS_THREADS || !BR2_PACKAGE_MESA3D_OPENGL_EGL > depends on BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_ELPUT > > +config BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_GL_DRM Is it useful to have it as a separate option from BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_DRM ? In which case can BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_DRM without BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_GL_DRM be useful ? > + bool "Evas GL DRM Engine" > + depends on BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_DRM > + depends on BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_OPENGLES # OpenGL ES with EGL support only So perhaps "BR2_PAKCAGE_EFL_GLES_DRM" is a better name? "GL" usually refers to "full OpenGL", as opposed to OpenGL ES. > + help > + This option enable building support for the Evas DRM Engine. This help text is wrong, as it is just a copy/paste of the one of BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_DRM. > + > +comment "Evas GL DRM Engine needs Evas DRM Engine, OpenGL ES w/ EGL" > + depends on BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_DRM && !BR2_PACKAGE_EFL_OPENGLES I find all those DRM/OpenGLES options in the efl package very confusing. Are all those options needed? What are the use cases for the different possible cases? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com