Hey Matt,
Op 22-08-12 17:45, Matt Turner schreef:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Maarten Lankhorst
> wrote:
>> And build gallium shared :)
> Seems reasonable to me, given that we do this for dricore.
>
> I've got a bunch of build patches waiting for review, so I'd
> appreciate holding this un
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Maarten Lankhorst
wrote:
> And build gallium shared :)
Seems reasonable to me, given that we do this for dricore.
I've got a bunch of build patches waiting for review, so I'd
appreciate holding this until those patches go in.
I'm going to try to automake Gallium
On Mit, 2012-08-22 at 08:32 -0600, Brian Paul wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 04:21 AM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> > And build gallium shared :)
> >
> > TODO: it seems ugly that all xvmc/vdpau/va drivers specify libgallium.a/so
> > directly, maybe it is better to move it out from there?
>
> The problem wi
On 08/22/2012 04:21 AM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
And build gallium shared :)
TODO: it seems ugly that all xvmc/vdpau/va drivers specify libgallium.a/so
directly, maybe it is better to move it out from there?
The problem with a separate libgallium.so is it's yet another
component that has to b
And build gallium shared :)
TODO: it seems ugly that all xvmc/vdpau/va drivers specify libgallium.a/so
directly, maybe it is better to move it out from there?
diff --git a/configs/current.in b/configs/current.in
index c490842..73d08be 100644
--- a/configs/current.in
+++ b/configs/current.in
@@ -1
