On Mon, 2012-10-08 at 16:44 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > On 7 October 2012 12:10, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote: > > On 5 October 2012 21:47, Richard Purdie > > <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> We don't want the cairo dependency. Unfortunately simply checking whether > >> its present > >> isn't good enough. If its not in DEPENDS, it can disappear half way > >> through building. > >> We therefore need to explicitly disable it. > > > > I've done roughly the same thing in this commit: > > http://cgit.collabora.com/git/user/daniels/poky.git/commit/?id=96a6e8e9eb7c086be3fcbde6a38ac3b699fca008 > > > > which has already been submitted upstream: > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2012-October/028514.html
Thanks for that, sending something upstream was on my todo list but I needed to fix the breaking builds more urgently. > My patch also has the advantage of not trying to link against Cairo if > it's present but disabled. Without this, if you build libdrm, build > Cairo, clean libdrm and attempt to rebuild it again, the rebuild will > fail, because the test still attempts to link with -lcairo, which > fails as Cairo's .la file references libdrm. I'm assuming you mean libdrm's .la file references cario? Since I pass in --disable-cairo, it never runs the pkgconfig test for cairo and never puts the include/library options into play. I did test that and just retested and it doesn't reference it. Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
