On 4/27/21 9:09 AM, Randy MacLeod wrote: > Cross-posting to yocto since this is of general interest. > > On 2021-04-23 2:02 p.m., Alexander Kanavin wrote: >> This puts them on equal terms with x11 distro feature >> (which I think is due). >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]> >> --- >> meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc >> b/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc >> index 9fcc10f83a..384ee7fc98 100644 >> --- a/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc >> +++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/default-distrovars.inc >> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ LOCALE_UTF8_ONLY ?= "0" >> LOCALE_UTF8_IS_DEFAULT ?= "1" >> LOCALE_UTF8_IS_DEFAULT_class-nativesdk = "0" >> -DISTRO_FEATURES_DEFAULT ?= "acl alsa argp bluetooth debuginfod >> ext2 ipv4 ipv6 largefile pcmcia usbgadget usbhost wifi xattr nfs >> zeroconf pci 3g nfc x11 vfat" >> +DISTRO_FEATURES_DEFAULT ?= "acl alsa argp bluetooth debuginfod ext2 >> ipv4 ipv6 largefile pcmcia usbgadget usbhost wifi xattr nfs zeroconf >> pci 3g nfc x11 vfat wayland opengl" >> DISTRO_FEATURES ?= "${DISTRO_FEATURES_DEFAULT}" >> IMAGE_FEATURES ?= "" >> > Randy,
> We (Wind River) already drop the x11 DF from some of our distros and > we'd likely do the same for wayland and opengl so while this seems > like the wrong change for headless systems it is one we could deal with. > > There was some discussion about this topic on the tech call today and > people were concerned about BSP support for opengl since the software > rendering in mesa is horridly slow. Thanks for bring this issue up. > > Kevin, Bryan, > Can you comment if you think we'd have any show-stopper problems > with opengl support for BSPs? Err, are they going to check my BSP ; ) > > Joshua said that weston has a usable RDP (remote desktop backend) but > I'm not sure how usable it is especially for single application sharing. > This contrasts with x11 where you can use X11 forwarding over > ssh trivially for whole desktops or an application. > > In conclusion, I see the value in pushing yocto forward but we may need > to wait for agreement from BSP folks so let's see what they say. The layer index BSP list is long so waiting for feedback may not be practical. I think it may be more of an awareness and how can the BSP maintainers work around the default if there are issues rather than stopping this progress in core. I personal would rather see my layer break so that I will be forced to take action. I see this as being no different than when we update u-boot or the kernel. - armin > ../Randy > > >> >> >> >> > > > > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#151043): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/151043 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/82317826/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
