On 03/03/10 16:08, John Burrell wrote:
> If only Mesa, xorg-server and the xorg video drivers use the drm headers,
> then there is no point installing them from the kernel source in LFS. That
> way we would all know where we stand and libdrm can be a dependency for any
> package that uses the hea
> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:19:25 +
> Subject: Re: libdrm-2.4.14 overwrites some drm linux-api-headers
> From: zarniwhoo...@googlemail.com
> To: blfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org
>
> On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> > Then should libdrm be built
>On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:25:16 +
>Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> On 3 March 2010 15:03, Matthew Burgess
> wrote:
> >> If by "as soon as possible" you mean "after the xorg libs,
> >> before Mesa / xorg-server / xorg video drivers" the answer
> >> is yes.
> >
> > Why "after xorg libs"? I generally build
On 3 March 2010 15:03, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> If by "as soon as possible" you mean "after the xorg libs,
>> before Mesa / xorg-server / xorg video drivers" the answer
>> is yes.
>
> Why "after xorg libs"? I generally build libdrm very early on, largely due to
> its minimal dependency tree.
>
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:19:25 +, Ken Moffat
wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>> Then should libdrm be built as soon as possible when bootstrap building
>> BLFS so as to minimise the chance that some other package will build
>> against Linux drm headers? And try to preve
On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> Then should libdrm be built as soon as possible when bootstrap building
> BLFS so as to minimise the chance that some other package will build
> against Linux drm headers? And try to prevent interface incompatibility
> in that way?
If by "as soon
>On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 00:04:25 -0600
>Mike McCarty wrote:
>
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
> > On a very new system (linux-2.6.33 + libdrm-2.4.18) I see the same
> > thing. Looking at the README in the tarball for libdrm:
> >
> > "New functionality in the kernel DRM drivers typically requires a
> > ne
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On a very new system (linux-2.6.33 + libdrm-2.4.18) I see the same
> thing. Looking at the README in the tarball for libdrm:
>
> "New functionality in the kernel DRM drivers typically requires a new
> libdrm, but a new libdrm will always work with an older kernel."
>
>
John Burrell wrote:
> If installed as root, libdrm will overwrite these linux-api-headers from
> /usr/include/drm:
On a very new system (linux-2.6.33 + libdrm-2.4.18) I see the same
thing. Looking at the README in the tarball for libdrm:
"New functionality in the kernel DRM drivers typically r
John Burrell wrote these words on 03/02/10 14:59 CST:
> If installed as root, libdrm will overwrite these linux-api-headers from
> /usr/include/drm:
I just built a stock LFS-6.5 machine which uses kernel 2.6.30.10 and
libdrm 2.4.14 and no files are overwritten. This must be something new
in newer
On 2 March 2010 20:59, John Burrell wrote:
> If installed as root, libdrm will overwrite these linux-api-headers from
> /usr/include/drm:
>
> test -z "/usr/include/drm" || /usr/lib/pkgusr/mkdir -p "/usr/include/drm"
> /usr/lib/pkgusr/install -c -m 644 'drm.h' '/usr/include/drm/drm.h'
>
> /usr/li
John Burrell wrote:
I rewrapped this for you. You might consider reading the FAQ.
> If installed as root, libdrm will overwrite these linux-api-headers
> from /usr/include/drm:
One point for "install users package management", I guess.
> test -z "/usr/include/drm" || /usr/lib/pkgusr/mkdir -p "/
If installed as root, libdrm will overwrite these linux-api-headers from
/usr/include/drm:
test -z "/usr/include/drm" || /usr/lib/pkgusr/mkdir -p "/usr/include/drm"
/usr/lib/pkgusr/install -c -m 644 'drm.h' '/usr/include/drm/drm.h'
/usr/lib/pkgusr/install -c -m 644 'drm_mode.h' '/usr/include/
13 matches
Mail list logo
