On 22 February 2016 at 22:15, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure thing. Pop it in an earlier commit and say something like "it
> does X as opposed to the current Y. we'll require the former with the
> follow-up openswr build infrastructure". Sorry to bother you with
> this, but my scons-foo is not ideal so I'm making sure that things are
> more digestable - be that for review or, if really needed, for revert.
>
An alternative to splitting the above one line into a separate patch
-> set up the scons and autotools builds in two separate commits. If
you prefer this route - do mention about the path -> rstr() change in
the commit message.
> The only thing that I can think of is having swr/Automake.inc
> (interesting name that we're stuck using) file, which is include(de)
> by avx{,2}/Makefile.am. The former contains all the common bits with
> the latter alike:
>
Should have mentioned this explicitly - it's fine to have the two
independent Makefiles currently, although give my proposal a test
later on.
Thanks
Emil
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
