| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Ferris McCormick wrote: |
| 5 |
> 3. With USE=-dri, for testing purposes (and in the end, perhaps for |
| 6 |
> performance reasons as well), it seems better to change the make target |
| 7 |
> to HOSTCONF=linux-sparc, and let user's CFLAGS define the architecture. |
| 8 |
> When you do this, you get both a glx-capable libGL and a stand-alone |
| 9 |
> libGL |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
And why is this a good thing? I'm adamantly against building the non-glx |
| 12 |
libGL here for standard use, and I will continue to oppose it. Be normal |
| 13 |
people and do the same thing as everybody else in the world who's ever |
| 14 |
used libGL in X. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> 4. For now, in case USE=-dri, I am not calling fix_opengl_symlinks. |
| 17 |
> Once I have all of X11R7 into test, I'll revisit this (and the Assembly |
| 18 |
> code question) to see what gives the best performance. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Same as above. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> These changes are not very pretty, but they have the benefit of |
| 23 |
> resulting in an ebuild for a mesa version of opengl which can actually |
| 24 |
> be tested independently from the rest of Modular X. It is even |
| 25 |
> conceivable that other architecture/graphics-card combinations might |
| 26 |
> require something similar. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I don't see how the standalone libGL has any relation to the ability to |
| 29 |
test mesa with old or new X. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Thanks, |
| 32 |
Donnie |
| 33 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 34 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) |
| 35 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
iD8DBQFC+49vXVaO67S1rtsRArphAJ9UrEwb0zjOkOvOP9mC4CkYlK8+jACgpFoa |
| 38 |
mqJAZXt6otRKnsGGLGl2RC8= |
| 39 |
=C0d6 |
| 40 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives