Hi Chuck, On 20 September 2018 at 16:03, Chuck Atkins <chuck.atk...@kitware.com> wrote: > ... >> >> Distributions already explicitly specify what they want and most of >> our autodetection is effectively a bad copy of that. > > > The big difference vs gnome is that *most* gnome packages are consumed by > users only as system libraries and thus package maintainers are the ones > build them, so it's not a big deal to have to explicitly configure it how > you want. Seldom will you have a miscelaneous user needing to build and use > thier own version of GNOME libs. Mesa, on the other hand, has an extensive > set of users just like that. A substantial portion of mesa's user base are > graphics developers that have no idea what most of the mesa options are or > what they do, but just need to have a new mesa build to fix a bug their > OpenGL code is hitting. As much as dealing with the "auto" implementation > sucks, I think it's important that the default out-of-the-box with no > arguments configuration should be sane and likely to produce something > useful, even if not optimal. > As you've noticed in the thread, experienced devs have script(s) which adjust the defaults/autodetection to fit their needs.
One thing I've always told people unfamiliar with the process: Start with the dependencies+toggles that your distribution uses. Then work up/down. On Debian that's as trivial as "build-deps" on others - perhaps less no. That said, I tend to read through the toggles and disable things I do not need. Guess I'm one of the few ;-) Either way, autotools is ok on the topic. We'll get to see any missing corner cases in meson sooner or later. HTH Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
