[OE-core] [RFC] OpenGL packaging/staging policy

[Daniel Stone]

Hi,

On 23 October 2012 19:37, Tomas Frydrych <tf+lists.yocto at r-finger.com> wrote:
> On 23/10/12 03:06, Daniel Stone wrote:
>> You can separate GLU, which we've already done.  I think you can
>> split out the core of libgbm, but not the DRI plugin.  And that's
>> about it.
>
> I am well aware that GL stacks are closely tied together, and personally
> would not advise anyone to mix and match. But please reread the original
> email Ross sent explaining the Cedar Trail 'complex' situation. If Intel
> want to use mesa GL and their PVR GLES1/2 / EGL binary bits together ...

That'll break catastrophically for anyone using GL + EGL, but eh, if
they're insane enough to support it, and you're insane enough to
explicitly allow for it as a supported configuration ...

> Regardless what is done with the packaging, allowing only mesa to stage
> dev files will break things. GL headers are not interchangeable, even if
> all the implementers are well behaved (which is a big if), the
> *platform.h files are allowed to be implementation specific and so have
> to be staged by the actual platform GL stack.

Right, I do agree with you, but in the mixed-stack situation, which
headers are we building against? :)

Cheers,
Daniel