On Mon, Sep 18, 2000 at 09:54:03AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote: > > However, a consensus has formed of late among the XFree86 developers, in > > conjunction with Brian Paul (the mastermind of the Mesa project), that > > libGLU should be shipped, built and installed with the rest of Mesa as part > > of the XFree86 distribution. I've corresponded with Brian on this point, > > and he suggests that the 3 libraries, libGL, libGLU, and libOSMesa, be > > shipped in one package. I see no compelling reason to do otherwise. > > What is Debian's policy regarding OpenGL libraries provided by > the hardware vendor (NVidia, for example)? Don't we get a > packaging conflict here? No. Debian has a virtual package called "libgl1" which any package providing a compliant GL library can "Provide" in the package management sense. However, I'm concerned that not every one of these implementations that ships libGL will also ship libGLU and (especially) libOSMesa. Brian, do you still think it is a good idea to keep all 3 of these libraries together? What set of GL libraries can any reasonable GL implementation be expected to provide? Only that and no more needs to be handled with this mechanism. -- G. Branden Robinson | When I die I want to go peacefully in Debian GNU/Linux | my sleep like my ol' Grand Dad...not branden@deadbeast.net | screaming in terror like his passengers. http://deadbeast.net/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgpwQ3eYTFQ8k.pgp
Description: PGP signature