On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 December 2016 at 18:24, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> On 13 December 2016 at 18:06, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> A workaround which just make to mind: >>>>> - keep --with-egl-platforms around and it's heuristics (which will >>>>> also be applied for --with-platforms). >>>>> - keep the --with-egl-platforms decisions for EGL only, and let one >>>>> override it via --with-platforms. Warn as the latter happens. >>>>> - warn for the deprecation of --with-egl-platforms >>>> >>>> And really --with-platforms is --with-egl-platforms + >>>> --with-vulkan-platforms (which I realize doesn't presently exist). >>>> >>>> And the reason you don't want to add it is that you're afraid someone >>>> will do something like >>>> >>>> --with-egl-platforms=drm --with-vulkan-platforms=x11 >>>> >>>> and it's a pain to make it so that EGL only has drm and vulkan only >>>> has x11? And eventually one might also want --with-vdpau-platforms, >>>> --with-vaapi-platforms, --with-whoknowswhat-platforms, and you don't >>>> want to keep adding them, since the chances that you *really* want >>>> those to be different for legitimate reasons is ... low. >>>> >>>> Is that right? >>>> >>> Precisely. >>> >>> If there is a legitimate reason, one can do a second mesa build... as >>> we do for DRI vs XLIB powered libGL, classic vs gallium OSMesa, etc. >>> Afacit having things configurable at such state is not supported by >>> either of the three build systems nor something that will scale - be >>> that from code or test POV. >> >> That all makes sense. I think that keeping --with-egl-platforms as a >> hidden option into eternity (or at least for a while until it becomes >> very unlikely to cross a bisect boundary) is my preferred solution, >> which sets the default value of --with-platforms. If you set both, >> then --with-platforms wins. And if you want to really be nice, warn >> about it. >> >> Is that roughly what you had in mind with your last suggestion? >> > Barring a "s/eternity/2-20 releases" - yes,. it's exactly what I was > thinking/talking about.
Sounds good. The remaining question is whether we really do want a single --with-platforms, or the individual ones, and actually make it work for the individual ones to have different things. I don't think I'm qualified to answer that question, but I think that's something that should be discussed with the relevant stake-holders. Cheers, -ilia _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev