On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/10/14 06:41, Ilia Mirkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On 29/09/14 17:24, Matt Turner wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> So all in all we have the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some distributions/people choose odd location of the modules. Which
>>>>> can lead to the system (vdpau/omx) looking at the wrong place for the
>>>>> backends, i.e. not working. One can consider that there is no way to
>>>>> override the module location at runtime.
>>>>
>>>> Do we have more specifics? If they're doing something stupid and it
>>>> breaks, they typically get to keep the pieces.
>>>>
>>>> Debian/Ubuntu install to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/vdpau/? Isn't
>>>> ${libdir} just /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ in that case?
>>>>
>>> Hmm I was under the impression that ${libdir} and
>>> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ are different things. Can I consider you as a
>>> volunteer for the following, even if the chances of it happening are zero ?
>>>
>>> On 29/09/14 17:16, Emil Velikov wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> How many volunteers do we have that will guide Debian/Ubuntu/other to
>>>> do the correct thing ? If we have at least one, I will be OK with
>>>> reverting the patch.
>>
>> Guide who? The maintainers? Sure, I'll happily help them out.
>>
> Pretty much everyone that reports a bug/send an email to the ML/posts a
> big and flashy "review" along the lines of "vdpau/omx/va is
> useless/broken" like YKW.
>
> The numbers/reports will be low (if any), but the encounters are likely
> to be quite "interesting".
I'm more than happy to enlighten people as to why what they're doing
is wrong. I guess this patch is good then?
-ilia
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
