[meta-freescale] [meta-fsl-arm][PATCH] Adding -lEGL and -lGAL to glesv2.pc

[Otavio Salvador]

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Thomas Senyk
<thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 21 June, 2013 11:08:19 Thomas Senyk wrote:
>> On Thursday, 20 June, 2013 17:33:00 Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Otavio Salvador
>> >
>> > <otavio at ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Thomas Senyk
>> > >
>> > > <thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com> wrote:
>> > >> From: Thomas Senyk <thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com>
>> > >>
>> > >> libGLESv2 has undefined symbols, which get provided by libEGL and
>> > >> libGAL,
>> > >> but libGLESv2 has no implicit 'link' to those libs.
>> > >> So if you link against libGLESv2 but not against libEGL and libGAL,
>> > >> you'll get 'undefined symbol'-errors.
>> > >>
>> > >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Senyk <thomas.senyk at pelagicore.com>
>> > >
>> > > Please change your short description to include the recipe name:
>> > >
>> > > gpu-viv-bin-mx6q: Add ...
>> > > <empty line>
>> > > libGLESv2 ...
>> > >
>> > > Signed-off-by: ...
>>
>> ah, right! sorry
>>
>> > I did this locally and pushed to master-next. Please follow these
>> > guidelines when doing the commit log so it easy finding which changes
>> > might affect each recipe.
>>
>> Thanks and I keep in mind for next time!
>>
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > --
>> > Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
>> > http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
>> > Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
>
>
> I've just spotted two other things:
>
> a: I skipped glesv1_cm.pc because I've not used it so far, but I looks like it
> has the same gco* and eglWaitClient symbols as "*UND*" as libGLESv2, so maybe
> it should be linked the same way

Can you update the patch and send a v2?

> and more importantly (at least for me):
> b: egl.pc (and glesv1_cm.pc) has:
>  "Requires.private: libdrm x11 xext xdamage xfixes xcb"
> this must be removed as it's wrong and harmful for non-x11 builds.
> If this is a 'must-have' for x11 builds, we need to have two files.
> Any thought from somebody who has done a x11 build on 4.0.0 drivers?

I agree; but it seems we'll need to handle it with two files. One  for
'fb' and another for 'x11'. The used one can be choosen by the backend
variable in use.

Can you take a look on this?

--
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://projetos.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750