[meta-freescale] mesa-dri vs amd-gpu-x11-bin-mx51

[Andrei Gherzan]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br>wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:
> > Le Sat, 12 Jan 2013 15:52:46 -0200,
> > Otavio Salvador <otavio at ossystems.com.br> a écrit :
> >
> >> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com> wrote:
> >> > Le Sat, 12 Jan 2013 17:54:13 +0200,
> >> > Andrei Gherzan <andrei at gherzan.ro> a écrit :
> >> >
> >> >> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Otavio Salvador <
> otavio at ossystems.com.br>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Eric Bénard <eric at eukrea.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> > > Hi,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > has anyone here already seen this messages ?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes; I started checking it but I still do not have an absolute
> answer
> >> >> > to how to fix it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The problem is xserver-xorg (when it has glx enabled) it depends on
> >> >> > mesa-dri. Both mesa-dri and GPU package libraries (the mx5 and mx6
> >> >> > ones) provide same (theorical) functionality of mesa-dri, libraries
> >> >> > and (most) headers leading to those errors.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I did check how Xorg is compiled in LTIB and it doesn't has glx
> >> >> > enabled so my idea is to disable glx in Xorg and try to go this
> route.
> >> >> > This would allow for a clean build at cost of making xserver-xorg
> >> >> > machine specific. Do you have any other idea?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Why do you need glx after all? We don't have opengl for imx53 right?
> >> >> And about the fix. Xorg with glx should  depend on virtual/libgl (or
> gl)
> >> >> not mesa-dri.
> >> >>
> >> > mesa-dri provides virtual/libgl which can explain why we find it here.
> >>
> >> In fact mesa provides all them (GL ES2 and GL ES1 too).
> >
> > yes, I was in Andrei's email context here.
> >
> > meta-ti has the following lines in libgles-omap3.inc :
> > PROVIDES += "virtual/egl virtual/libgles1 virtual/libgles2"
> >
> > RREPLACES_${PN} = "libegl libgles1 libgles2"
> > RREPLACES_${PN}-dev = "libegl-dev libgles1-dev libgles2-dev"
> > RREPLACES_${PN}-dbg = "libegl-dbg"
> >
> > note they have the RREPLACES which are not in meta-fsl-arm's recipes.
>
> Makes sense; but this fixes rootfs problem, not sysroot conflict. My
> mean concern here is now it behave in concurrent build?
>
> Let's say:
>
> - xserver-xorg building (so mesa-dri installed at sysroot)
> - qt4-x11 build start (so will install amd/vivante libraries at sysroot)
>
> As we don't have individual sysroot for every package in build, this
> is something that I don't know the end result.
>
> So I think the right fix is to get rid of glx for mx5 and make
> xserver-xorg glx to build with vivante libraries  for mx6.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
I will tell you my point of view having into consideration imx6.

There are a couple of issues here:
1. in oecore the glx PACKAGECONFIG concludes dri flags and glx flags.
Which, in my opinion is wrong. These should be separated.
2. xserver-xorg should be compiled with dri needed for vivante driver
3. no glx for imx6 - as we don't have libgl

Fix:
Split PACKAGECONFIG in glx and dri. Use PACKAGECONFIG_append_imx6qsabrelite
= " dri ".

P.S.: I can take care of patches for imx6 in on this issue.

ag
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.yoctoproject.org/pipermail/meta-freescale/attachments/20130113/323247e4/attachment.html>