‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, July 19th, 2021 at 8:24 AM, Ricardo Wurmus <[email protected]> wrote:
> John Kehayias [email protected] writes: > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > > > On Monday, July 12th, 2021 at 11:22 AM, John Kehayias > > > > [email protected] wrote: > > > > > Just pinging here. If there are no good reasons not to, I think > > > > > > we should move ahead with getting libdrm and Mesa up to date, > > > > > > with https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49412 and > > > > > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 We can work on moving to > > > > > > libglvnd as a separate patch series. > > > > > > Anyone have some thoughts or can these be pushed (to > > > > > > core-updates)? > > > > As an update, both the libdrm and Mesa patches are ready. Given > > > > the work for libglvnd that needs to be done, I think that should > > > > be on a separate patch series. > > > > Will these updates be merged before the core-updates freeze? > > We could also create a new branch to better track how the > > mesa/libdrm upgrades affect packages. > Hi Ricardo, Is there something we anticipate breaking with a mesa/libdrm update? I've built xorg and some WMs and didn't run across anything. I don't recall any breaking changes in release notes. I thought this would be handled as part of core-updates and the process there? (Please correct me if I'm wrong, still new here!) If you meant for a future move to libglvnd, discussion on the Mesa patch at https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 had at least one person using libglvnd and looks like only a limited number of packages that would need updates to build. But we could address the need for a branch there if it seems needed to make many changes or if we run into any problems. Anyway, it was pointed out I neglected to have the revised patch for Mesa at https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 so let me send that there now. John
