On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 23:04:51 +0300, Stavros Giannouris wrote > Óôéò Thu, 15 Jun 2006 20:39:49 +0100 > Ï/Ç "Philip Dillon-Thiselton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Ýãñáøå: > > > Doable? Please say yes or we got big problems :) > > The actual problem is that each package provides its own version of the > conflicting files, which cannot really by substitued by each other, > so we get a set of conflicting packages. > > Things should be fine as long as the packages that need one of these > files uses the 'libgl' dependency, which can be satisfied by any one > of those three packages. > > But you can't have them installed at the same time.
It's just as Stavros says; ATI and Nvidia create their own proprietary libGL libraries that are just different enough from Mesa's to be incompatible: ATI needs ATI's libGL, and Nvidia needs Nvidia's libGL. As for the Xorg extention modules, Nvidia is the only one providing proprietary versions of those - the files in the ATI package (as in the libgl-dri package) are symlinks to Xorg's version of those files, installed with the extention .xorg (iirc). you could probably get hackish and use LD_LIBRARY_PATH and different paths to different libGL.so files, but then that wouldn't cover the Xorg extention modules... and it's ugly. Is there any reason you need to use the proprietary nvidia and fglrx drivers in Archie (which I'm assuming this is what it's for)? Wouldn't Xorg's 'free' drivers be enough? -- Cerebral _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
