| 1 |
I noticed that Mesa >= 3.5 is masked but I don't understand why. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
In package.mask says: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
#mesa 3.5 apparently breaks source compatibilty with 3.4.2 and we should |
| 6 |
#stay with 3.4.2 'cause so many apps depend on it. (drobbins, 26 Jan |
| 7 |
2002) |
| 8 |
#sad but true, we're stuck at 3.4.2. |
| 9 |
# |
| 10 |
#think we should try mesa 4.0.1 sometime, although including glu in the |
| 11 |
xfree |
| 12 |
#ebuild seems to have good results. |
| 13 |
#azarah (29/01/2002) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I don't see how the first comment can be true as Mesa is an implementation |
| 16 |
of the OpenGL standard which, besides of source compatibility, also has |
| 17 |
binary compatibility within a platform. Mesa releases notes also don't |
| 18 |
mention nothing like that. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Regarding the second comment I found the referring bug number 245. It says |
| 21 |
that NVIDIA can't use the SGI libGLU.la 1.3 included in Mesa >=3.5. If so |
| 22 |
then why is the same SGI libGLU 1.3 available trhu the sgi-oss-glu ebuild? |
| 23 |
Stranger is that the "Nvidia OpenGL Configuration mini-HOWTO" |
| 24 |
(http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/mini/Nvidia-OpenGL-Configuration/) uses Mesa |
| 25 |
4.0.1 in the tutorial, but on the other hand the author does state that |
| 26 |
"not had time to test all the procedures"... |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
So it seems that there is quite a bit of misunderstanding. Is it mine or |
| 29 |
should I fill in a bug report? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
José Fonseca |
Archives