On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 12:59:05PM +0100, Burton, Ross wrote: > On 25 April 2016 at 17:50, Denys Dmytriyenko <de...@denix.org> wrote: > > > One other thing I was thinking is how to avoid conflict between separate > > libgbm and the one provided by mesa-gl. As mesa-gl may be useful for > > providing > > SW rendering for OpenGL, while leaving OpenGLES to a separate provider, > > like > > SGX. Unfortunately, mesa-gl also provides libgbm - would PACKAGECONFIG to > > use > > a standalone external libgbm work and be acceptable here? > > > > I added a PACKAGECONFIG for libgbm to mesa.inc, enabled it for mesa and > disabled it for mesa-gl, and mesa-gl still build fine but didn't ship a > libgbm. > > I've forgotten the details about all of this: does mesa-gl shipping libgbm > make sense at all? Or in the real world will BSPs either use mesa or their > own GLES driver + their own libgbm + mesa-gl if required?
Hmm, that is a good question. Probably expecting a separate libgbm by default when using own GLES driver + mesa-gl does make sense. I wonder if anyone is using the one from mesa-gl with their own GLES, then we would need it configurable via PACKAGECONFIG... -- Denys -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
