On 15 Apr 2008, at 15:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Dear Jack, > > I do not want to have a full mesa package. We can still make mesa- > libglw a split off of mesa, if you want to; and keep mesa-libglw > linking to the system GL (providing hardware acceleration). > > I just proposed additional changes to the naming conventions and > possibly having also a full mesa package just to go with my > proposed changes to the naming conventions, i.e., > 1. why call it mesa-libglw while linking to system GL? Shall we > call it libglw* instead? > 2. Can we also have a mesa-libglw linking to mesa GL, just for the > sake of completion and be consistent in the naming as I proposed > earlier. > > Hope I have made it clear. Please let me know what you want to do > with mesa and mesa-libglw, even if it is just carrying like it is now. > > Many thanks. > > Best regards, > Murali.
Those seems reasonable questions, and put very nicely. The reply came in the form of the following msg to fink-devel.. On 15 Apr 2008, at 15:51, Jack Howarth wrote: > Murali has asked me to help create a mesa > package with libglw splitoff that builds against > the system libGL. I am puzzled as to why we really > want to have a complete mesa package in fink. > Such a package will obviously use software > rendering and thus be an order of magnitude > slower than the system libGL which uses > direct rendering. > I have asked the X.org developers and they > do intend to port the X.org X11 Leopard packages > to build using Mesa 7 at some point (with > modifications to properly use direct rendering). > It would seem better to wait for that (as a > replacement of the MacOS X X11) than to > downgrade the performance of OpenGL with > software rendering. > Jack This seems to misunderstand the original request of a bit of coordination between the maintainers of those 2 pkgs (which have the same source). Besides, we can't wait _ we have a mesa pkg, and there are pkgs needing and using it now; further it provides libs (like libOSMesa) that xorg doesn't. And there is no reason to downgrade performance _ any pkg uses the libs it wants (or needs..) I am sure you both can coordinate those pkgs via private e-mail.. JF Mertens ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
