On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Christopher James Halse Rogers
christopher.halse.rog...@canonical.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 08:58 +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
This promotes a private interface to a public one, right? If so that
isn't really doing us any favours as next people will
On Tue, 21 Dec 2010 08:58:24 +, Keith Whitwell kei...@vmware.com wrote:
This promotes a private interface to a public one, right? If so that
isn't really doing us any favours as next people will complain when that
newly public interface varies between releases.
If you want to save disk
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 08:58 +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
This promotes a private interface to a public one, right? If so that
isn't really doing us any favours as next people will complain when that
newly public interface varies between releases.
Not really; the new libraries are private
This promotes a private interface to a public one, right? If so that
isn't really doing us any favours as next people will complain when that
newly public interface varies between releases.
If you want to save disk space by sharing components, what about an
alternate approach -- investigate
On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Christopher James Halse Rogers
christopher.halse.rog...@canonical.com wrote:
This an adds --enable-shared-dricore option to configure. When enabled,
DRI modules will link against a shared copy of the common mesa routines
rather than statically linking these.
This an adds --enable-shared-dricore option to configure. When enabled,
DRI modules will link against a shared copy of the common mesa routines
rather than statically linking these.
This saves about 30MB on disc with a full complement of classic DRI
drivers.
---
Resending as it seems to have
