Re: Mesa mess

[Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>]

On 2013-10-23 11:13, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On 2013-10-23 08:07, Burton, Ross wrote:
>> On 23 October 2013 14:43, Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com> wrote:
>>> With the current master (Poky ffb440c37c), I can't build anything
>>> with a virtual/mesa requirement.  This seems to bring in both mesa
>>> and mesa-gl, which fight to the death, killing the build :-(
>>
>> Presumably you want just mesa-gl?
>>
>> I guess your distro is setting a preferred provider for
>> virtual/something to mesa-gl, and something else is pulling in mesa,
>> probably through a default.  Can you check that all of the
>> mesa-related virtual/* lines are set in your distro, my hunch is that
>> you don't have virtual/mesa set to mesa-gl.

I also compared all of the PREFERRED_PROVIDERs between my build and a stock
poky build and they are identical.

>>
>> If the distro looks right then try using depexp to see what is pulling
>> in mesa when it shouldn't be?
>
> I looked through this and nothing was obvious.  According to depmod, neither
> mesa nor mesa-gl have any direct "reverse depends", i.e. packages that depend
> on them.  As far as I can see, it's just coming from the xserver-xorg dependency
> on virtual/mesa.
>
> Which led me to another experiment which I truly do not understand.  I removed
> the mesa-gl recipe and now when I try to build 'virtual/mesa' I get a message
> that there is no provider :-(  However, I *can* build mesa with no problems.
> I also checked it against the other PROVIDES from mesa.inc and all of them
> except for virtual/mesa work.  How can this possibly be?

To be clear, 'bitbake virtual/libgl' (or any of its friends except virtual/mesa)
will cause 'mesa' to be built, but 'bitbake virtual/mesa' fails.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |  Consulting for the
MLB Associates              |    Embedded world
------------------------------------------------------------