DJ Lucas wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> DJ Lucas wrote: > >>> So, the >>> remaining question is wether to add the two libs (by name) to the Mesa >>> deps or no? >> >> >> I'm not sure exactly what you mean. As I review the xorg7 page, it >> looks like we should just have mesa as a required dependency at the top. >> I know that you have a note in the xorg applications section, but I >> think that should be removed and the dependency added. > > Unfortunately, it's not exactly possible to build Mesa at the top of the > build, it'd be a reciprocal dependency. Mesa depends on some Xorg7 > Libs. Although the note should be revised to include 'if you intend to > utilize Mesa..." Other option is to put it at the top, no note, and > leave the dep on Xorg7 _Libs_ on the Mesa page (what we have now IMO is > a bit more descriptive, however).
OK, but I would still prefer the style to be: Optional Dependency: mesa The location is OK because, as you point out, the X libs are needed first. >> There are so many options that *could* be discussed, I think it would be >> better to treat this as the non-modular system and only give one way >> through the maze. >> > > Just need to reinforce that BLFS expects _everything_ to be built. > Cutting it down is possible, but you are on your own (until more > pioneering users appear and update the wiki). No need for a special > mention on the Mesa page. Great. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
