On 18 October 2016 at 00:58, Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 05:34:02PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 17 October 2016 at 16:39, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> >> wrote: >> > On Monday, 2016-10-17 22:53:20 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:39:11PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> >> > On 17 October 2016 at 10:53, Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > On Sunday, 2016-10-16 16:38:35 +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: >> >> > >> On OpenBSD try to dlopen 'libglapi.so', ld.so will find >> >> > >> the highest major/minor version and open it in this case. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Avoids '#error Unknown glapi provider for this platform' at build >> >> > >> time. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Gray <j...@jsg.id.au> >> >> > > >> >> > > LGTM, and I guess the other *BSD will want the same since 7a9c92d0 >> >> > > broke >> >> > > them too. >> >> > > >> >> > I'm not 100% sure about that. OpenBSD (unlike other BSD) did bump the >> >> > major when the ABI breaks due to 'internal' changes - think of >> >> > off_t/time_t on 32 vs 64bit systems and alike. >> >> > >> >> > Unlike Linux kernel/distros, BSDs tend to be more relaxed when in >> >> > comes to ABI, I believe. Don't quote me on that one ;-) >> >> >> >> OpenBSD tends to favour simplified interfaces over backwards compatiblity >> >> and is more like a research system in that respect. As the kernel >> >> and userland are one source tree ioctl compat largely doesn't exist. >> >> System calls get deprecated and removed over the course of a few releases. >> >> So we didn't go through the pain of duplicated systems calls for off_t >> >> as mentioned, and don't go in for symbol versioning. Just major.minor >> >> library versioning, which is roughly symbol removals, major crank, >> >> symbol additions minor crank. >> >> >> >> I believe FreeBSD tends to go in for backwards compatibility more >> >> but am not familiar with the details. They also have a different ld.so. >> >> >> >> Perhaps an else case for 'libglapi.so.0' would be appropriate for all >> >> the other various unices instead of the #error ? >> > >> > Yeah actually, I'm thinking reverting this hunk of 7a9c92d0 might be a >> > better, >> > to avoid the potentially huge list of every *BSD and other Unix: >> > >> Fwiw I've intentionally added the hunk since I was a bit lazy to check >> if the BSD(s?)/Solaris/others have bumped the major locally. Having a >> closer look that's not the case, so indeed we can add revert to >> libglapi.so.0 in the else statement. >> >> Jonathan, how about we with the above instead ? > > At the moment OpenBSD has libglapi.so.0.2 for Mesa 11.2.2. > New versions of Mesa add new shared_dispatch_stub_* symbols, > which the minor would crank for. > Don't think we [intentionally] added any symbols for a long while.
> I'd prefer the diff I mailed for OpenBSD for if the major version > should crank for some reason. Let's worry about that if/when it happens ? Emil /me lands the rest of the patches _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
