Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#21161 - [mesa] Why not just split the rest of libs from mesa?
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by lh (jarryson) - Saturday, 09 October 2010, 15:23 GMT
Last edited by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR) - Saturday, 09 October 2010, 17:08 GMT
Opened by lh (jarryson) - Saturday, 09 October 2010, 15:23 GMT
Last edited by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR) - Saturday, 09 October 2010, 17:08 GMT
|
DetailsNow mesa-demo is already independent from mesa, mesa only contain libGLU and libGLw witch may needed by some applications. These libs can be put in libgl or a new package.
if so, mesa can be complete only makedepends. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Andreas Radke (AndyRTR)
Saturday, 09 October 2010, 17:08 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Additional comments about closing: think off closed source drivers that ship their own libgl version. our current packaging way looks quiet good to me. advantage of further splitting would be small. only mesa-libs and mesa-common would make some small sende to me.
Saturday, 09 October 2010, 17:08 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Additional comments about closing: think off closed source drivers that ship their own libgl version. our current packaging way looks quiet good to me. advantage of further splitting would be small. only mesa-libs and mesa-common would make some small sende to me.