Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it > okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit > big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: > > configs/beos | 2 +- > configs/darwin | 2 +- > configs/default | 4 +- > configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- > configs/linux-cell | 2 +- > configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- > configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- > configure.ac | 2 +- > include/GL/glew.h |14435 > > include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - > include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - > src/SConscript | 1 - > src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - > src/glew/Makefile | 54 - > src/glew/SConscript | 69 - > src/glew/glew.c |14320 --- > src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 > src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 > 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. Cheers Jakob. ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz > wrote: >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: Yes please. Kristian ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: configs/beos |2 +- configs/darwin |2 +- configs/default|4 +- configs/freebsd-dri|2 +- configs/linux-cell |2 +- configs/linux-dri-xcb |2 +- configs/linux-indirect |2 +- configure.ac |2 +- include/GL/glew.h |14435 include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - src/SConscript |1 - src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - src/glew/Makefile | 54 - src/glew/SConscript| 69 - src/glew/glew.c|14320 --- src/glew/glewinfo.c| 8441 src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. Looks good. But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we don't all have find/install the latest version. Any volunteers to do that? -Brian ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: > Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz > > wrote: > >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it > >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit > >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: > >> > >> configs/beos |2 +- > >> configs/darwin |2 +- > >> configs/default|4 +- > >> configs/freebsd-dri|2 +- > >> configs/linux-cell |2 +- > >> configs/linux-dri-xcb |2 +- > >> configs/linux-indirect |2 +- > >> configure.ac |2 +- > >> include/GL/glew.h |14435 > >> > >> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - > >> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - > >> src/SConscript |1 - > >> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - > >> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - > >> src/glew/SConscript| 69 - > >> src/glew/glew.c|14320 > >> --- > >> src/glew/glewinfo.c| 8441 > >> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 > >> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) > > > > This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. > > Looks good. > > But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we > don't all have find/install the latest version. Any volunteers to do > that? Indeed, that was the point of having it. I don't see that anything has really changed from that point of view. I don't mind which repo it's in, but I'd like to keep hold of it. Keith ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Keith Whitwell wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: >> Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz >> > wrote: >> >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it >> >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit >> >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: >> >> >> >> configs/beos | 2 +- >> >> configs/darwin | 2 +- >> >> configs/default | 4 +- >> >> configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-cell | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- >> >> configure.ac | 2 +- >> >> include/GL/glew.h |14435 >> >> >> >> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - >> >> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - >> >> src/SConscript | 1 - >> >> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - >> >> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - >> >> src/glew/SConscript | 69 - >> >> src/glew/glew.c |14320 >> >> --- >> >> src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 >> >> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 >> >> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) >> > >> > This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. >> >> Looks good. >> >> But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we >> don't all have find/install the latest version. Any volunteers to do >> that? > > Indeed, that was the point of having it. I don't see that anything has > really changed from that point of view. I don't mind which repo it's > in, but I'd like to keep hold of it. I saw no objections and after I applied the patch I couldn't find any files with the strings "glew" or "GLEW" in them. So I have push the change to master. Keith as far as I can tell the version in mesa is unused, somebody should probably add it to the demos repository but thats another issue. But people on automake need to rerun autogen.sh. Cheers Jakob. ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: > Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz > > wrote: > >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it > >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit > >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: > >> > >> configs/beos |2 +- > >> configs/darwin |2 +- > >> configs/default|4 +- > >> configs/freebsd-dri|2 +- > >> configs/linux-cell |2 +- > >> configs/linux-dri-xcb |2 +- > >> configs/linux-indirect |2 +- > >> configure.ac |2 +- > >> include/GL/glew.h |14435 > >> > >> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - > >> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - > >> src/SConscript |1 - > >> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - > >> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - > >> src/glew/SConscript| 69 - > >> src/glew/glew.c|14320 > >> --- > >> src/glew/glewinfo.c| 8441 > >> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 > >> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) > > > > This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. > > Looks good. > > But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we > don't all have find/install the latest version. Yes. And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on windows easy again. Jose ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: > On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: >> Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: >> > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz >> > wrote: >> >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it >> >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit >> >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: >> >> >> >> configs/beos | 2 +- >> >> configs/darwin | 2 +- >> >> configs/default | 4 +- >> >> configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-cell | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- >> >> configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- >> >> configure.ac | 2 +- >> >> include/GL/glew.h |14435 >> >> >> >> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - >> >> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - >> >> src/SConscript | 1 - >> >> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - >> >> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - >> >> src/glew/SConscript | 69 - >> >> src/glew/glew.c |14320 >> >> --- >> >> src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 >> >> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 >> >> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) >> > >> > This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. >> >> Looks good. >> >> But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we >> don't all have find/install the latest version. > > Yes. > > And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on > windows easy again. glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. -- Dan ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
Dan Nicholson wrote: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: configs/beos |2 +- configs/darwin |2 +- configs/default|4 +- configs/freebsd-dri|2 +- configs/linux-cell |2 +- configs/linux-dri-xcb |2 +- configs/linux-indirect |2 +- configure.ac |2 +- include/GL/glew.h |14435 include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - src/SConscript |1 - src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - src/glew/Makefile | 54 - src/glew/SConscript| 69 - src/glew/glew.c|14320 --- src/glew/glewinfo.c| 8441 src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. Looks good. But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we don't all have find/install the latest version. Yes. And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on windows easy again. glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo. I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have to setup the automake stuff. -Brian ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Brian Paul wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz > wrote: >> >> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it >> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit >> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: >> >> configs/beos | 2 +- >> configs/darwin | 2 +- >> configs/default | 4 +- >> configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- >> configs/linux-cell | 2 +- >> configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- >> configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- >> configure.ac | 2 +- >> include/GL/glew.h |14435 >> >> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - >> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - >> src/SConscript | 1 - >> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - >> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - >> src/glew/SConscript | 69 - >> src/glew/glew.c |14320 >> --- >> src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 >> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 >> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) > > This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. Looks good. But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we don't all have find/install the latest version. >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on >>> windows easy again. >> >> glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people >> use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that >> from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the >> main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. > > I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up > somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo. > > I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have > to setup the automake stuff. I'm sure we can also make automake detect if glu and glut is installed and use the system ones instead of the ones shipping within the demos repo (also overridden with a option). Can we do the same to glu and glw? Giving "--disable-glu --disable-glw --disable-glut" as arguments to configure is getting old. Cheers Jakob. ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Brian Paul wrote: >> Dan Nicholson wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: > > Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz >> wrote: >>> >>> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it >>> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit >>> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: >>> >>> configs/beos | 2 +- >>> configs/darwin | 2 +- >>> configs/default | 4 +- >>> configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- >>> configs/linux-cell | 2 +- >>> configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- >>> configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- >>> configure.ac | 2 +- >>> include/GL/glew.h |14435 >>> >>> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - >>> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - >>> src/SConscript | 1 - >>> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - >>> src/glew/Makefile | 54 - >>> src/glew/SConscript | 69 - >>> src/glew/glew.c |14320 >>> --- >>> src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 >>> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 >>> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) >> >> This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. > > Looks good. > > But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we > don't all have find/install the latest version. Yes. And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on windows easy again. >>> >>> glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people >>> use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that >>> from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the >>> main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. >> >> I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up >> somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo. >> >> I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have >> to setup the automake stuff. > > I'm sure we can also make automake detect if glu and glut is installed > and use the system ones instead of the ones shipping within the demos > repo (also overridden with a option). What I'd like to do sooner or later is add *-uninstalled.pc files to the repo to support the "I want to link the demos against the libGL in my mesa tree" case that I figure lots of developers use. Then you could just do PKG_CONFIG_PATH=$HOME/src/mesa and the demo tree would never know the difference. > Can we do the same to glu and glw? > > Giving "--disable-glu --disable-glw --disable-glut" as arguments to > configure is getting old. Again, people/distros use these as their system glu and glw, so you can't just drop them from the mesa repo without moving them to an alternate location. However, we can easily make configure default to not building them. -- Dan ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Dan Nicholson wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz > wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Brian Paul wrote: >>> Dan Nicholson wrote: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: > > On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: >> >> Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz >>> wrote: Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: configs/beos | 2 +- configs/darwin | 2 +- configs/default | 4 +- configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +- configs/linux-cell | 2 +- configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +- configs/linux-indirect | 2 +- configure.ac | 2 +- include/GL/glew.h |14435 include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - src/SConscript | 1 - src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - src/glew/Makefile | 54 - src/glew/SConscript | 69 - src/glew/glew.c |14320 --- src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441 src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) >>> >>> This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. >> >> Looks good. >> >> But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we >> don't all have find/install the latest version. > > Yes. > > And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on > windows easy again. glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. >>> >>> I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up >>> somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo. >>> >>> I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have >>> to setup the automake stuff. >> >> I'm sure we can also make automake detect if glu and glut is installed >> and use the system ones instead of the ones shipping within the demos >> repo (also overridden with a option). > > What I'd like to do sooner or later is add *-uninstalled.pc files to > the repo to support the "I want to link the demos against the libGL in > my mesa tree" case that I figure lots of developers use. Then you > could just do PKG_CONFIG_PATH=$HOME/src/mesa and the demo tree would > never know the difference. Or just use GL_CFLAGS=-I$HOME/src/mesa/include GL_LDFLAGS=-L$HOME/src/mesa/lib ./configure, but I guess the *-uninstalled.pc is less typing. Tho can .pc point to directories relative to the location of the .pc file? That will help for linking but not running without setting up LD_LIBRARY_PATH, tho I know automake can generate wrapper scripts if you use progname_LDADD = my_lib.la that picks up the right library at run time (see drm.git/tests/kmstest). I dunno if it will do the right thing with libraries added via AM_LDFLAGS, or ones external to the current build. > >> Can we do the same to glu and glw? >> >> Giving "--disable-glu --disable-glw --disable-glut" as arguments to >> configure is getting old. > > Again, people/distros use these as their system glu and glw, so you > can't just drop them from the mesa repo without moving them to an > alternate location. However, we can easily make configure default to > not building them. Sorry communication error on my part, thats what I wanted to do, just as long as I don't have to deal with them in Mesa. Move them either to the demos repo (but that feels like shuffling lint from one pocket to another), or their own separate repository. I'm perfectly content with using the ones from my distro, they have hardly changed in the last past 5 years. Cheers Jakob. ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Brian Paul wrote:
Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
>>>
>>> Jakob Bornecrantz wrote:
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz
wrote:
>
> Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it
> okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit
> big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy:
>
> configs/beos | 2 +-
> configs/darwin | 2 +-
> configs/default | 4 +-
> configs/freebsd-dri | 2 +-
> configs/linux-cell | 2 +-
> configs/linux-dri-xcb | 2 +-
> configs/linux-indirect | 2 +-
> configure.ac | 2 +-
> include/GL/glew.h |14435
>
> include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 -
> include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 -
> src/SConscript | 1 -
> src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 -
> src/glew/Makefile | 54 -
> src/glew/SConscript | 69 -
> src/glew/glew.c |14320
> ---
> src/glew/glewinfo.c | 8441
> src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173
> 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-)
This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch.
>>>
>>> Looks good.
>>>
>>> But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we
>>> don't all have find/install the latest version.
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on
>> windows easy again.
>
> glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people
> use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that
> from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the
> main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons.
I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up
somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo.
I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have
to setup the automake stuff.
>>>
>>> I'm sure we can also make automake detect if glu and glut is installed
>>> and use the system ones instead of the ones shipping within the demos
>>> repo (also overridden with a option).
>>
>> What I'd like to do sooner or later is add *-uninstalled.pc files to
>> the repo to support the "I want to link the demos against the libGL in
>> my mesa tree" case that I figure lots of developers use. Then you
>> could just do PKG_CONFIG_PATH=$HOME/src/mesa and the demo tree would
>> never know the difference.
>
> Or just use GL_CFLAGS=-I$HOME/src/mesa/include
> GL_LDFLAGS=-L$HOME/src/mesa/lib ./configure, but I guess the
> *-uninstalled.pc is less typing. Tho can .pc point to directories
> relative to the location of the .pc file?
I'm not 100% sure how it works, but here's an example:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/glib/tree/glib-2.0-uninstalled.pc.in
I think the "relative to .pc file" part is ${pcfiledir}, although
${pc_top_builddir} is confusing me.
> That will help for linking but not running without setting up
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH, tho I know automake can generate wrapper scripts if
> you use progname_LDADD = my_lib.la that picks up the right library at
> run time (see drm.git/tests/kmstest). I dunno if it will do the right
> thing with libraries added via AM_LDFLAGS, or ones external to the
> current build.
This is actually a libtool generated wrapper script. It's one of the
really nice features of libtool, and it usually works pretty well for
both internal and external libraries.
--
Dan
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
Re: [Mesa-dev] RFC: Drop glew from mesa
Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Brian Paul wrote: Dan Nicholson wrote: On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:07 AM, José Fonseca wrote: On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:36 -0700, Brian Paul wrote: Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Jakob Bornecrantz wrote: Since we don't have any progs in mesa that uses glew anymore is it okay if we drop it? I have attached a patch which drops it its a bit big so I packed it. And here is the change thingy: configs/beos |2 +- configs/darwin |2 +- configs/default|4 +- configs/freebsd-dri|2 +- configs/linux-cell |2 +- configs/linux-dri-xcb |2 +- configs/linux-indirect |2 +- configure.ac |2 +- include/GL/glew.h |14435 include/GL/glxew.h | 1476 - include/GL/wglew.h | 1247 - src/SConscript |1 - src/glew/LICENSE.txt | 73 - src/glew/Makefile | 54 - src/glew/SConscript| 69 - src/glew/glew.c|14320 --- src/glew/glewinfo.c| 8441 src/glew/visualinfo.c | 1173 18 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 41299 deletions(-) This got stuck in the moderation queue, resending without the patch. Looks good. But it would be handy to have glew in the mesa-demos tree so that we don't all have find/install the latest version. Yes. And glut, could we move glut to demos too? It would make building on windows easy again. glut might be something that deserves its own repo since some people use Kilgard's glut as their system glut. Requiring them to get that from a demos package seems a little odd. But splitting it out of the main mesa package seems nice, if not just for licensing reasons. I'd be OK with that, but please don't remove it until glut is set up somewhere else, either in the demo repo or a new repo. I could move the glew sources into the demo tree but someone else will have to setup the automake stuff. I'm sure we can also make automake detect if glu and glut is installed and use the system ones instead of the ones shipping within the demos repo (also overridden with a option). Can we do the same to glu and glw? Actually, I'd like to take a little time to let things settle down a bit before moving GLU and GLUT out of the Mesa tree. I'm still cleaning up loose ends from the changes we've made so far. Also, I like being able to build all these libs at once and point LD_LIBRARY_PATH to one place to be sure I'm getting all the libraries I expect. Having 3 or 4 different locations for all this stuff isn't going to be as convenient for some of us. Let me think about it. Giving "--disable-glu --disable-glw --disable-glut" as arguments to configure is getting old. Do you do that just to reduce compile time? -Brian ___ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
