Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-01-31 03:42:00) > On 30 January 2018 at 21:31, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > > Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-01-30 10:43:06) > >> On 29 January 2018 at 18:57, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > >> > Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-01-29 10:15:50) > >> >> The big comment is taken from the equivalent block in configure.ac > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric.engest...@imgtec.com> > >> >> --- > >> >> meson.build | 30 > >> >> +++++++++++++++++++++-------- > >> >> src/gallium/targets/d3dadapter9/meson.build | 2 +- > >> >> src/mesa/drivers/dri/meson.build | 2 +- > >> >> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/meson.build b/meson.build > >> >> index 0a00798c2a5093ec803b..6d7a8e976ff6ad002d9a 100644 > >> >> --- a/meson.build > >> >> +++ b/meson.build > >> >> @@ -41,6 +41,20 @@ pre_args = [ > >> >> > >> >> '-DPACKAGE_BUGREPORT="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Mesa";', > >> >> ] > >> >> > >> >> +# The idea is that libdrm is distributed as one cohesive package, even > >> >> +# though it is composed of multiple libraries. However some drivers > >> >> +# may have different version requirements than others. This list > >> >> +# codifies which drivers need which version of libdrm. Any libdrm > >> >> +# version dependencies in non-driver-specific code should be reflected > >> >> +# in the first entry. > >> >> +libdrm_version = '2.4.75' > >> >> +libdrm_amdgpu_version = '2.4.89' > >> >> +libdrm_etnaviv_version = '2.4.82' > >> >> +libdrm_freedreno_version = '2.4.82' > >> >> +libdrm_intel_version = '2.4.75' > >> >> +libdrm_nouveau_version = '2.4.66' > >> >> +libdrm_radeon_version = '2.4.71' > >> > > >> > Is there any reason we can't just make these (for example): > >> > libdrm_radeon_version = '>= 2.4.71' > >> > > >> > Since that avoids all of the format calls? > >> > > >> Is there particular reason why meson doesn't allow plain > >> concatenation, and one must go through the format dance? > >> Off the top of my head, I think that most higher level programming > >> languages (including python) have it, making for clearer and more > >> obvious code. > >> > >> That aside: > >> A huge +1 from me on the idea, although the libdrm_foo checks should > >> become libdrm && libdrm_foo. > >> See commit 2b4eaabff01a3a8ea0c4742ac481492092c1ab4f. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Emil > > > > I'm confused by that commit. pkg-config is supposed to handle this, > > libdrm_intel > > (for example) has `Requires : libdrm` in it, so when you generate libs you > > get > > `-ldrm_intel -ldrm`. Why do we need to check libdrm as well? If it's just > > that > > we need to make sure that the version matches we should fix the pkg-config > > files > > in libdrm to set `Requires : libdrm >= version`. Or am I missing something? > > > Only libdrm_intel has Requires: libdrm. Everyone else has the > 'correct' Requires.Private > Thus adding a version check won't be enough. > > Personally the commit feels like a workaround but Dave and Ilia wanted > it, so we went ahead. > > -Emil
If we need to ensure that the versions of libdrm == libdrm_* then Requires.private is the wrong field to use. What do you think the correct thing to do here is? Dylan
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
