* Brice Goglin wrote: > Hi Thierry, > > While cleaning the BTS of Mesa, I found #374904 which claims that > libgl1-mesa-dev should provide GLw libs and headers as > libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev does. This bug actually comes from #374303 where > "inventor" failed to build because it requires GLw headers but was > depending on libgl1-mesa-dev. It has been changed to depend on > libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev, with an invitation to fix mesa in the future. > > libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev and libgl1-mesa-dev must conflict since they both > provide libGL.so.1. But we should be able to build things on any of them > and run on the other (as pointed out by Michel in #374303). However, > since GLw is only included in libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev, any application > requiring GLw cannot build on libgl1-mesa-dev. Moreover, we don't ship > any shared libGLw. > > So I think we should move GLw headers and libs from > libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev to their own package (maybe libglw1-mesa and > libglw1-mesa-dev?) and ship both GLw shared and static libs. Then, any > application using GLw directly would have to depend on these new > packages instead of libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev (and eventually depend on > libgl-dev too if needed). > > If this looks ok (and once we have a name for the new packages), I'd be > happy to work on it. This is in fact something I had planned to do myself for Lenny, but I'm not sure that I will have the time in the near future (things should get less busy in about a month or so). If you want to take a shot at it in the meantime, feel free to do so. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature