-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ferris McCormick wrote: | It always makes sense to enable glx (Mesa) whether there is DRI support | or not; some applications can run adequately well using the | Mesa-indirect approach, and some graphics cards --- e.g., Elite == afb | --- don't allow dri at all. That is what (for sparc, at least) USE=glx | should control.
I don't see why mesa should have a glx USE flag, unless you're referring to a flag in xorg-server? | So, ultimately, the mesa ebuild should work as you have it if it is | given USE="dri glx", but it should build sparc-specific modules. | However, it it gets USE="-dri glx", it should arrange to build libGL | stand-alone, because the user is saying in effect "I do want mesa/openGL | installed, but I am unable to support DRI", and mesa can be built that | way. I still don't understand why they wouldn't just build a glx-using libGL instead of an Xlib-using libGL. This would mean setting a blank DRI_DIRS and keeping DRIVER_DIRS = mesa. I can understand, however, that one might like to avoid building the DRI drivers with a USE=dri flag. In fact, you've actually convinced me that the glx USE flag as a whole is probably a bad idea and I should always force it on in xorg-server too. Thanks, Donnie -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC+p/nXVaO67S1rtsRAtX2AKC0tCW1WwHURu1ZYGdoTiu3dOwEVACg1ueW tYBYd/QFC8xbf5mSE8sJymg= =O7eX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
