Hi,
On 07/27/2017 04:13 PM, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 01:49 -0400, David Airlie wrote:
So, should this package be added to base-x ? Should something depend on
it? Should X actually start up without libEGL.so.1, and I should file
*that* as a bug? Thanks!
Hans might answer
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 01:49 -0400, David Airlie wrote:
> > So, should this package be added to base-x ? Should something depend on
> > it? Should X actually start up without libEGL.so.1, and I should file
> > *that* as a bug? Thanks!
>
> Hans might answer this better, but X should start fine
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 01:49 -0400, David Airlie wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks! Wanted to run this up the flagpole somewhere before I just
> > went and did it...
> >
> > We have a couple of openQA tests which just run Firefox on top of a
> > bare X server to do some browser tests. Up to now just 'dnf
>
Dne 25.7.2017 v 04:04 Adam Williamson napsal(a):
> Hi folks! Wanted to run this up the flagpole somewhere before I just
> went and did it...
>
> We have a couple of openQA tests which just run Firefox on top of a
> bare X server to do some browser tests. Up to now just 'dnf
> groupinstall
>
> Hi folks! Wanted to run this up the flagpole somewhere before I just
> went and did it...
>
> We have a couple of openQA tests which just run Firefox on top of a
> bare X server to do some browser tests. Up to now just 'dnf
> groupinstall base-x' then 'dnf groupinstall firefox', then 'startx
Adam Williamson wrote:
> So, should this package be added to base-x ? Should something depend on
> it? Should X actually start up without libEGL.so.1, and I should file
> *that* as a bug? Thanks!
I'd say add to base-x (at least). There may be places where adding an
explicit dependency may make
Hi folks! Wanted to run this up the flagpole somewhere before I just
went and did it...
We have a couple of openQA tests which just run Firefox on top of a
bare X server to do some browser tests. Up to now just 'dnf
groupinstall base-x' then 'dnf groupinstall firefox', then 'startx
