<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 25 April 2016 at 17:50, Denys Dmytriyenko <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:denis@denix.org" target="_blank">denis@denix.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":3bq" class="a3s aXjCH">One other thing I was thinking is how to avoid conflict between separate<br>
libgbm and the one provided by mesa-gl. As mesa-gl may be useful for providing<br>
SW rendering for OpenGL, while leaving OpenGLES to a separate provider, like<br>
SGX. Unfortunately, mesa-gl also provides libgbm - would PACKAGECONFIG to use<br>
a standalone external libgbm work and be acceptable here?</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>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.</div><div><br></div><div>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?</div><div><br></div><div>Ross</div></div></div></div>