Ian Romanick <i...@freedesktop.org> writes:
> On 12/03/2012 03:43 PM, Carl Worth wrote:
>> This strangely-escaped apostrophe was causing a build failure
>> ("invalid escape sequence") resulting in no "de" translations in the
>> final options.h file.
>
> It seems like this patch should go before 4/5 so that bisects will build.My phrasing of "build failure" was poor. The build proceeds fine so bisect will not be affected, (just some translations will be missing). But it's obviously easy to re-order these too. So I'm happy to do that. > You'll need to get Chad and / or Tapani to help with Android build. I'm happy to support Android, so I'm willing to learn whatever is needed here. That said, I'm not convinced that the current approach we have is ideal. The current setup has duplicated information between Makefile.am and Android.mk files. This is inherently fragile. I would definitely prefer an approach where this is one, canonical build system. It seems to me, that from Mesa's point-of-view, Android is just another distribution. All other distributions are able to use Mesa's build system and then package up the results of the build. I think Mesa should be happy to host some top-level file to help with that packaging, (whether mesa.spec for Fedora, debian/rules for Debian, or Android.mk for Android), if the distribution would prefer to have the files in Mesa's tree, (some really prefer to maintain this stuff separately). But I don't think it makes sense for any distribution to maintain an independent build system throughout every level of the Mesa source code. Can someone explain what I'm missing? What's the technical justification for the current setup? -Carl -- carl.d.wo...@intel.com
pgpohuAVzk8Qk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
