Dan Nicholson <dbn.li...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 3:18 PM, tom fogal <tfo...@sci.utah.edu> wrote: > > Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersm...@oracle.com> writes: > >> On 12/22/10 02:30 PM, tom fogal wrote: > >> > >> We generally don't copy macros from the autoconf-archive into > >> xorg-macros, [. . .] Is there any reason not to do that here? Why > >> should we add multiple levels of indirection to keep in sync? > > > > We shouldn't, I was just ignorant. I'll respin. > > > > ... and I have. Attached. Both against xorg/xserver this time. > > Tom, I thought the issue here was that mesa glx would get built > with TLS, but xserver glx wouldn't. It seems like what you'd really > want to do is get this macro into mesa so it could autodetect TLS > capabilities and then use some value from mesa pkgconfig to detect > how mesa glx was built.
I tried that, and others pointed out that a TLS-enabled X server can load any kind of driver, so it's better to aggressively enable TLS there, and then it basically doesn't matter what we do in Mesa. The patch I sent to do exactly what you say was shot down: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2010-December/004397.html Julien had expressed interest in getting the X server to do this, though. > What do you think? I don't have an opinion, really ;) My lone goal at present is to get Mesa to auto-enable TLS. I'm just trying to do whatever's asked so I can get that in... but it seems there is some disagreement within the community as to the best approach. I think it's basically you and Eric A. advocating contradictory approaches; if you two could work out what you'd like to see, I'll implement it... Thanks, -tom _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev