On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 03:27:57AM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: >Hello, >пт, 23 нояб. 2018 г. в 03:18, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer ><perezme...@gmail.com>: >> >> Hi! Please let me reply first to your last part: >> >> > Is there any possible way to support *BOTH* OpenGL / OpenGLES? Mutually >> > exclusive from an install POV, but give the end user the choice which to >> > install? Why should we have one Architecture forced down a path >> > different to another architecture? >> >> No, I'm afraid there is no way to do that. We did consider it many times, but >> is definitely too much work to hack on. >> >> So we need to force an architecture (actually, all of them!) to either one or >> the other. > >Can you build two packages and allow user to select, which one he wants to >install? Or those packages will be binary incompatible?
That's a good question, yes. It'w ahst I was wondering too. ... >> So far I personally know 0 people with an arm64 board with PCI slots, while I >> know many with arm64 boards with hardware GLES support. > >I'm working with big arm64 iron, so for me a server arm64 board with PCIe slots >(and thus PCIe graphic cards) and on-board Aspeed "VGA card" is more common >compared to GLES-enabled arm64 SoC. Yeah - it depends exactly on your background. There's a small (but growing) set of arm64 desktop users, and it would be unfortunate to cut them off. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com "... the premise [is] that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect." -- Bruce Schneier