Hi Sangwon, On 2014-07-25 12:10 PM, 하상원 wrote: > Hi Damian, > > I don't think all drivers being supported thru Mesa is a good idea. > > There are probably more GPU vendors who don't provide Mesa compatible drivers.
I agree 100% > > Anyway, I think there're two sides to consider: build-time and runtime > requirements. > > For build-time, opengl-es-virtual-drv seems to be enough and being very > lightweight, > > it wouldn't need any upkeep in terms of bugs and fixes. I agree here too. > > Mesa could also be used during build time instead of the opegl-es-virtual-drv. Yes and no, I think. There is the minor problem that the Mesa drivers provide a versioned libGLESv2.so.2, which all of the built packages will link to. This means that if I want to install a driver (such as Mali or SGX) after the fact, I have to provide libGLESv2.so.2 to overwrite the Mesa driver. If Mesa changes its version number for some reason, now the Mali and SGX drivers must update their names as well. opegl-es-virtual-drv is nice because it is not versioned, so as long as there is a libGLESv2.so (or a link of that name) in the non floss drivers, everything works. > > As for the glesv2 issue, we'll look into it and see if we can provide a nice > solution. Thank you. Damian _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
