Ian Romanick wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 09:59:01PM +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > But can't we assume that the user is upgrading from a stable XFree 4.2.0
> > > > installation?
> > > >
> > > No. XFree86 4.2.0 is Mesa 3.4.x based, and it seems XFree86 4.3.0 will
> > > be Mesa 4.0.x based. A MAJOR update!
> >
> > I think we have to look at the scope of what we're trying to do: provide an
> > updated dri driver. I'd prefer to view the indirect renderer as being part of
> > the X server, and not really an important part of the download.
>
> This seems reasonable to me. If the libGLcore.a is device independent, then
> why not distribute it by itself? That way, people that want / need it can
> have it, and people that don't, don't have to bother.
I have to agree with Keith and Ian on this one. I would like to see
this packaging pave the way for independent driver suite releases, and
avoiding replacing device independent libraries is a big step in the
right direction.
If we have to replace a device independent file for a driver suite
release, then we should look at fixing the interface.
-- /\
Jens Owen / \/\ _
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / \ \ \ Steamboat Springs, Colorado
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
