Re: [RFC] OpenGL packaging/staging policy

[Tomas Frydrych <tf+lists.yocto@r-finger.com>]

Hi Ross,

On 22/10/12 17:35, Burton, Ross wrote:
> Rule 3. Only Mesa stages, nothing else

I think it is a big mistake to special case mesa as anything other than
*a* GL provider. GL stacks provide their own headers, these headers
might not be identical to the mesa headers, and people writing GL
software for the particular target have every right to expect to be
using the headers provided with their GL stack -- sooner or later this
rule will have to be broken because of customer software  not buildable
under Yocto. (Whether the headers should be identical is neither here
nor there; Yocto needs to work in the real world, and you well know that
in the real world this is not the case.)

I know some folk don't like to hear this, but whether you like it or
not, GL libs are tied to specific HW, i.e., are machine-specific. Our
current difficulties stem directly from trying to pretend this is not
the case, or that mesa is somehow more than just *a* GL provider. IMHO
the correct thing to do here is:

a) Make the mesa packages machine specific so we can control compatible
machines and preferred providers to match the HW realities,

b) Split the ginormous mesa recipe, so that it is, for example, possible
to stage mesa gl without mesa egl, so that we can accommodate HW that
wants to use bits of mesa.

Tomas