[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Upgrade Mesa to latest Mesa-CVS?



Hans de Goede wrote:

Adam Jackson wrote:
Hans de Goede wrote:
Adam Jackson wrote:
Hans de Goede wrote:
Adam Jackson <ajackson <at> redhat.com> writes:
Requires moderately non-trivial fixes to the X server build system
too, which is why I haven't done it yet.  Probably should do
though. I just hate to be in a situation where we're shipping CVS
bits in
FC6; I keep hoping Mesa will hurry up and release a 6.5.1 already.
Anything I can do to help? Are you really planning on updating mesa for
FC-6, or would it be worth my time to see if I can isolate a few
important r300 fixes and backport those?
Planning a backport, yes.  There are apparently enough Intel and <=R200
issues fixed in CVS that it should just be done whole.  Hopefully 6.5.1
happens Really Freaking Soon so I don't have to ship CVS bits in FC6.

That said, if updated srpms for mesa and xorg-x11-server were to
magically appear in Bugzilla for me, I certainly wouldn't object ;)

Magically appearing SRPM for latest mesa-CVS filed here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201365

I've been using this with great success on an x86_64 in both 64 and 32
bit mode (I compiled it in a 32 bit chroot and installed the result on
my 64 bit Fedora for use with googleearth).

You also speak about xorg-x11-server changes, I haven't got any for you
as things work fine for me with the current xorg-x11-server in RawHide.
I was expecting that build system fixes would be required, since
xorg-x11-server builds against the mesa-source package.  Have you
attempted to rebuild the X server with a mesa-source from CVS?


nope, I didn't know that the xserver is build against mesa-sources,
strange I would have thought the 2 would be pretty independent.

Eitherway I'll be gone for a couple of days now, so I cannot try
building the X-server. Why don't you give it a shot and let me know the
result? If it turns out it needs some work, but is fixable and you would
be willing to update to mesa CVS if the work gets done for you I'm
probably willing to fix this once I'm back.

Something like the attached (untested) patch might be enough to make the xserver build with the cvs mesa rpm. It's basically just a backport of the GLcore Makefile.am changes from the xserver git master branch since 1.1 branched.

Kristian
diff --git a/GL/mesa/main/Makefile.am b/GL/mesa/main/Makefile.am
index 867fe57..4d5b0cd 100644
--- a/GL/mesa/main/Makefile.am
+++ b/GL/mesa/main/Makefile.am
@@ -29,6 +27,7 @@ nodist_libmain_la_SOURCES = accum.c \
                     api_loopback.c \
                     api_noop.c \
                     api_validate.c \
+                    arrayobj.c \
                     attrib.c \
                     blend.c \
                     bufferobj.c \
@@ -67,6 +66,7 @@ nodist_libmain_la_SOURCES = accum.c \
                     points.c \
                     polygon.c \
                     rastpos.c \
+                    rbadaptors.c \
                     renderbuffer.c \
                     state.c \
                     stencil.c \
diff --git a/GL/symlink-mesa.sh b/GL/symlink-mesa.sh
index ccaa2a9..32f839a 100755
--- a/GL/symlink-mesa.sh
+++ b/GL/symlink-mesa.sh
@@ -88,8 +88,11 @@ symlink_mesa_main() {
     action api_noop.h
     action api_validate.c
     action api_validate.h
+    action arrayobj.c
+    action arrayobj.h
     action attrib.c
     action attrib.h
+    action bitset.h
     action blend.c
     action blend.h
     action bufferobj.c
@@ -168,6 +171,8 @@ symlink_mesa_main() {
     action polygon.h
     action rastpos.c
     action rastpos.h
+    action rbadaptors.c
+    action rbadaptors.h
     action renderbuffer.c
     action renderbuffer.h
     action simple_list.h

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]