2010/6/22 Kristian Høgsberg <[email protected]>: > I think the egl-drm-display branch looks good. The platform display > patch is definitely good to commit, and I don't see a problem in > merging the entire egl-drm-display branch either. As I said before, I > was practically sold on the multi-egl idea, until I realized that the > libEGL-drm.so dependency is pulled into higher level libraries that > use EGL in a platform-independent way. What you implemented in > egl-drm-display is exactly what I would've done myself. Great. I will merge the branch. > I'm still on the fence about -DMESA_EGL_NO_X11_HEADERS vs #include > <egldrm.h>, that is, I think adding a new egldrm.h header file that > defines the eglGetDRMDirsplayMESA() (and potentially DRM specific > surface create functions) is a pretty clean approach as well. In > fact, I think that would make sense for X11 and the other existing > platforms too. Ideally, including egl.h wouldn't define any native > types or display/surface create functions. I am fine with -DMESA_EGL_NO_X11_HEADERS or egldrm.h. One idea I have is to install egl-drm.pc. Applications may check egl-drm.pc to define the macro automatically, or know the existence of egldrm.h. > But for now, egl-drm-display gets us what we want. Thanks for taking this on.
-- [email protected] _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
