Am Tue, 12 Oct 2010 22:51:01 +0200 schrieb Thomas Bächler <[email protected]>:
> Am 12.10.2010 22:06, schrieb Dan McGee: > > Honestly, can this decision to split the package be explained a bit > > more? I feel like we've gone a little overboard on doing some of > > these splits. Saving 405K from a package (installed, while only 80K > > on the download!) seems silly for the number of "where did my glx* > > tools go" and "I installed mesa but don't have glx*" questions that > > are going to arise now, especially from long-time Arch users. > > It was in a separate package for some time in the past, then merged > into mesa again. I agree with Dan here. > Mesa-demos are now distributed with a different version number in a separate tarball. It has it's own maintainer and is developed independently from main mesa sources for a while now. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/mesa-dev/2010-July/001295.html -Andy
