Personally I lean towards 2 or 3. The nice bit about making libdrm a real DSO is that it removes the need to have the libdrm source around when building the -dri targets in Mesa, or when building the server; you just need to have built it already. You have to handle libdrm versioning anyway. We may as well think about it explicitly. Fortunately libdrm is pretty static, the last change that even might have broken the ABI was 14 months ago.
Any thoughts?
I think making DRM a shared library is a good idea and would facilitate drm use by software other than Xserver or Mesa driver.
best
Vladimir Dergachev
- ajax
------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek. It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
