Hi Matt, On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 at 16:30, Hoosier, Matt <matt.hoos...@garmin.com> wrote: > Okay, makes sense that you don’t want to have to repeat the dependencies’ > builds for every CI test. I’m not arguing that you should – it was just more > a thought experiment to see whether riding Meson subprojects is a reasonable > idea for establishing a development environment. > > I get your point that that can become a deep rabbit hole. But it seems that > you didn’t have any need to build LLVM and similar just to support the > hand-built copy of Mesa that’s in the CI. Is there some reason why a deeper > set of transitive dependencies would be needed using Meson subprojects than > when building by hand? Seems like I could probably just mimic what you’ve > done. Maybe your point is that the CI is a very constrained environment > that’s known not to need ATI or llvmpipe, but a general developer situation > with physical machines would?
Oh no, the CI environment absolutely needs llvmpipe! We install quite a few development packages (cf .gitlab-ci/debian-install.sh) into the CI environment though, so although we don't build LLVM, we do absolutely depend on distro LLVM development packages which aren't present in a clean distro install. You're completely right though that it makes no difference to the dependency chain whether the dependencies come from Meson subprojects or previous installs though. Cheers, Daniel
