Julien Cristau <email@example.com> (22/07/2011): > So in principle I dislike the idea of making the mesa packages messier > to make the closed driver packages' life easier. One thing that's been > a source of countless bug in the current system is diversions, because > they're evil, and people keep getting them wrong, and users don't > understand/expect them, and all kinds of fun ensues. If mesa were to > not ship the /usr/lib/$arch/libGL.so.1 (and friends) symlink, but > instead ship an alternative itself, would that be enough to put an end > to the diversions? Not that I think alternatives are ideal either, but > if we're going to have to put up with something I'd rather it wasn't > *both* alternatives and diversions. > > Not sure what other X people think. I'd rather avoid the mess of diversions *AND* alternatives indeed. If adding alternative support to mesa is the price to pay, I guess we could work something out. Please note I'm very busy right now, consequently far behind on anything X-related; sorry for that. Mraw, KiBi.
Description: Digital signature