comments inline
-----Original Message----- From: Sébastien Taylor [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sébastien Taylor Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 10:20 AM To: Sundararaj Prabhu-B36876 <[email protected]>; Otavio Salvador <[email protected]>; Viguera, Javier <[email protected]>; Post Lauren-RAA013 <[email protected]>; Hochstein Tom-R60874 <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Different use of libOpenVG in meta-fsl-arm and official meta-fsl-bsp-release Also related to this subject, it is not clear to me what these two libraries provide exactly. >> https://www.khronos.org/openvg/ If either are available does that mean emulating OpenVG using the 3D GPU when using the 3d flavour of the library? >> yes What is the use-case for this? >> https://www.khronos.org/openvg/ Target Applications Are there issues with the 2d library that might cause a user to want to emulate OpenVG? >> No issues On 2015-11-16, 9:00 AM, "Sundararaj Prabhu" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >It is customer preference to choose libOpenVG.3d or libOpenVG.2d and it is >build time decision. Not sure whether the current recipe provide the build >options to choose libOpenVG.3d or libOpenVG.2d for DQ. But this is easily >fixable. > >But it is hard to use the same rootfs when need for OpenVG.3D on DL/solo and >OpenVG.2D for i.MX6DQ. >We know the expectation is runtime identification or export variable switch, >but currently not supported. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Otavio Salvador [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 9:24 AM >To: Viguera, Javier <[email protected]>; Post Lauren-RAA013 ><[email protected]>; Hochstein Tom-R60874 ><[email protected]> >Cc: [email protected]; Sundararaj Prabhu-B36876 ><[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [meta-freescale] Different use of libOpenVG in >meta-fsl-arm and official meta-fsl-bsp-release > >On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Viguera, Javier <[email protected]> >wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Otavio Salvador [mailto:[email protected]] >>> >>> >>> This highlights a serious problem. Freescale says the QDL are >>> software compatible however this symlink mangle breaks this >>> assumption. Mainly it is not possible to use same rootfs, in read-only, for >>> them all. >>> >>> I added few Freescale people on Cc so they can comment on it. >> >> Did you get any feedback on this? >> >> Anyone? > >I am still waiting; I discussed this with Lauren and she said she were going >to check this internally. I added her on Cc so she can comment on this. > >-- >Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems >http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br >Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 >-- >_______________________________________________ >meta-freescale mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale -- _______________________________________________ meta-freescale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-freescale
