I don't even understand the argument. Lets turn it around/right again:
Why not just dlopen libGL.so? Any application should be able to dlopen
libGL.so.

"libGL.so" is the library name everyone agrees to and everyone expects
to find, which is exactly why this file exists in the first place,
doesn't it? One should expect that this primary library name points to
the most reasonable and (before all else) WORKING OpenGL library. If a
distribution decides to do some name mangling for maintaining multiple
versions or vendors it is of course free to do so. Please name it
"libGL.so.foo" or "libGl.so.bar" if you want, buy why is it necessary
for pyqt to know about your naming decision and most importantly: Why is
it necessary to stick with a broken(!) default configuration?

It baffles me that it took 4 years to boil it down to one line of not
giving a damn.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/941826

Title:
  dlopen(libGL.so) resolves to mesa rather than nvidia

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nvidia-drivers-ubuntu/+bug/941826/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to