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

Re: Upcoming Qt switch to OpenGL ES on arm64

Hi Steve!

El miércoles, 28 de noviembre de 2018 04:00:52 -03 Steve Langasek escribió:
> > At this point I really feel that, except I am missing something, double
> > building is just not a good idea :-/
> Ok, I don't think you've understood then.  Perhaps a further example from
> the Ubuntu archive would help.  As of Ubuntu 16.04, here is the *complete*
> list of packages that had a hard dependency on any of the 5 GL-linked Qt
> libraries, where that dependency could not instead be satisfied by the GLES
> build:
> $ grep-dctrl -n -sSource:Package -FDepends \
>         -e
> 'libqt5(gui|3drenderer|quick|quickparticles|quickwidgets|multimediawidgets)
> 5[[:space:]]*(\(>= 5\.[0-9.]*\))(?|$),' \
> /var/lib/apt/lists/archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_xenial_*binary-amd64_Pac
> kages | sort -u maliit-plugins
> ovito
> pyqt5
> qml-box2d
> qt3d-opensource-src
> qtbase-opensource-src
> qtdeclarative-opensource-src
> qtubuntu-cameraplugin-fake
> stellarium
> wallch
> $
> Every single other binary package that depends on libqt5gui5 (etc) in Ubuntu
> 16.04 has an ORed dependency on libqt5gui5 | libqt5gui5-gles.

Ah, now I do get your point. That works as long as the difference between the 
Desktop GL/GLES builds are that the GLES build produces just less symbols and 
no new ones comparing to Desktop GL.

*But* there is also usr/include/<m-a>/qt5/QtGui/qtgui-config.h which differs.

According to codesearch.debian.net the affected non-Qt libraries packages are:


Of course all of this would need a check to see how they use it.

> Three of the results in this list are familiar; they were already in the set
> of dual-stack libraries.
> Several are applications (ovito, stellarium, wallch), and if they say they
> require full GL, that's legitimate, and that just means users would only be
> able to install them on systems using the full desktop GL.  (That's fine,
> and certainly better than not being able to build/install them at all.)
> maliit-plugins is not an application, but it's a rather specialized
> component with no reverse-dependencies (i.e. not a library).
> qml-box2d is likely to have never been uploaded after the symbols handling
> was implemented in Ubuntu, therefore never picked up the alternate
> dependencies (the package isn't in Debian, anyway).
> And pyqt5, since it's language bindings for the full Qt API, would also need
> to be double-built (but had not been in Ubuntu).
> The qml packages built from these libraries - qml-module-qtlocation,
> qml-module-qtmultimedia, qtdeclarative5-qtlocation-plugin - would also need
> proper handling, but the impact on dependency graphs should be similarly
> self-limiting; because just as for C programs, the vast majority of QML
> applications don't care about the distinction between GL and GLES backends
> and *expect* Qt to abstract this away for them.
> So based on this, Ubuntu missed exactly one package in order to fully
> support both GL and GLES builds of Qt, bringing the total to 6 instead of 5.
> There might be more now, but I'd be surprised if the total number of
> affected source packages in Debian today reached double digits; and in any
> case the question lends itself to the same sort of analysis as above, so
> anyone interested in doing this in Debian can reasonably work out the scope.

The number of source packages directly affected is around 20 (not counting the 
noes I mentioned before). Some of them are libraries like qwt, that can't 
simply be used with GLES. Some are applications that can be patched to build 
with either one or the other. And some are applications that will simply only 
work with Desktop GL.

We where in the process of determining those rdeps, but at this point I guess 
that if someone is interested in this approach should take it over. Of course, 
pretty please feel free to ask us in the team for pointers/help if needed.

> And each of those gles source packages is a purely mechanical transformation
> of the base Qt source package.
> So perhaps someone in this thread is willing to put in this effort to
> maintain 6 source packages, in order to avoid having to make a choice
> between GL and GLES on arm64.

I know concur that it *might* be possible, but:

- Double builds will need to be kept quite in sync. I remember Timo (DD/Ubuntu 
maintainer who worked on this on Ubuntu) stating that it was not easy. Of 
course, I don't know the details.

- Around 20 source packages (hopefully less) will fall in one of this 
  - Only usable with Desktop OpenGL
  - Will need a double build, sometimes with patches, or fall into the first 
  - Packages are not limited to one team.

- Desktop OpenGL should probably be the default installation. Switching to 
GLES will probably need the user installing libraries by hand, maybe even 
reinstalling some libs/apps.

In my point of view it's too hacky. But then again, this is Debian: if someone 
wants to do the work and be ready to clean up if it fails then: welcomed.

lo cual parece incompatible.
lógica, esa tendrá particiones dentro,
si se transforma la extendida a
tiene particiones lógicas, luego
extendida. Una extendida
estar dentro de una partición
Una partición lógica necesita

Diga NO al topposting.

  Matias Silva Bustos

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: