More modularization.

Mike A. Harris mharris at redhat.com
Sat Nov 19 16:23:08 UTC 2005


Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> 
>>> I (and many others, definitely) haven't neither i810-based cars, nor 
>>> others from this list. So question is - why I enforced to install all 
>>> of these dri-modules? We can simply split this package into a bunch 
>>> of little packages, for example mesa-libGL, mesa-dri-i810, 
>>> mesa-dri-i830, etc. It''s not a hard work, IMO.
> 
> 
>> This is a long term possible feature.  In order for this to happen, here
>> is what needs to be done:
> 
> 
> Looks like we are talking abount different things, Mike.
> For splitting Mesa-package, we don't need to submit even single line of 
> code into mainstream Mesa-sourcetree. All we need is to provide 
> additional subpackages in the SPEC-file (look at attachment, where I 
> provide a patch to the mesa.spec, used for building FC's mesa* rpm's).
> 
> All we need is to properly patch SPEC-file.

In short: No. Absolutely not.  ;o)

For the longer version, please reread my first email.  As I stated
therein, this is not due to it being technically impossible to do.
It is a concious and intentional choice that all Mesa drivers are
provided in one package right now, and I plan on keeping it that way
at least until all of the items I outlined in the first email are
met.

Hope that clarifies things.  ;o)




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list