[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: A Round of Removals (utah-glx)

On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 09:57:10PM -0500, Lukas Geyer wrote:
> Philip Brown <phil@bolthole.com> writes:
> > Also, there is the side issue that there are a lot of "broken"
> > OpenGL programs out there. utah-glx does not provide all possible
> > extensions. However, properly written OpenGL programs are SUPPOSED to
> > query for existence of an extension, and work around it if not present.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, a lot of linux OpenGL progs dont do that, it seems.
> > 
> > Strictly speaking, utah-glx DOES provide an opengl development environment.
> > If you want "provides libgl-dev" to have more meaning than that, then
> > please specify that somehow.
> Please check again what I said about MESA support.

Please notice that nowhere in my email did I address mesa support.
I solely addressed the issue of pure opengl support.
"supporting mesa" is in no way interchangable with that.

It hasnt even occurred to me to even check if utah-glx even properly
fulfils that (ie: is it a lacking in the library itself, or just
 a mispackaging issue?)
That's not a particular goal of the utah-glx project, although it might
also fulfil it as a side effect of including mesa source.

PS: I'm part of the 'upstream' team.
But no, I dont have enough time to take over debian packaging of it.
Sorry :-|

Reply to: