[RFC]: More robust build sys for UMR

StDenis, Tom Tom.StDenis at amd.com
Sun Feb 5 15:16:19 UTC 2017

Hi all,

Never mind answered my own question:

$ pkg-config libdrm --cflags

So we could in theory include "drm.h" and then just add that to the head of our CFLAGS.


From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> on behalf of StDenis, Tom <Tom.StDenis at amd.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2017 09:55
To: Bas Nieuwenhuizen; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC]: More robust build sys for UMR

Hi Bas,

What would be a good way to work around the paths though? Is there a pkg config for libdrm?

From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> on behalf of Bas Nieuwenhuizen <bas at basnieuwenhuizen.nl>
Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2017 08:12
To: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [RFC]: More robust build sys for UMR


I think the current build system is a bit too naive though. On my distro archlinux the libdrm headers are installed in /usr/include/libdrm, which causes the include to drm/drm.h in src/lib/query_drm.c to fail.

So if it is in /usr/include/drm on Ubuntu, we are going to need some autodetection to find the right include path. Autotools definitely sounds like overkill to me, and the current build system is pretty simple indeed, but needing to change the source isn't ideal.

By the way, I don't think the current make system handles dependencies on headers correctly? e.g. if I modify umrapp.h, make rebuilds nothing.  This is one of the things cmake gives you for free, though with a bit of work make can do it too.

Yours sincerely,
Bas Nieuwenhuizen

On Sun, Feb 5, 2017, at 12:42, StDenis, Tom wrote:

Hi Edward,

Well the patches apply and work but I'm not really sure what problem it's meant to solve [😊] .  Building previously was actually simpler with "make" as opposed to "mkdir build && cd build && cmake .. && make".

On a BSD system (where this wouldn't really work without the corresponding debugfs entries) gmake could be used to build it provided ncurses/pciaccess were around.

If this legitimately makes it more stable to build on Linux systems then I'm all for it.  Can anyone elaborate on where the simple make system would fail?

(I'm not saying NAK I'm simply asking for my own edification).



From: Edward O'Callaghan <funfunctor at folklore1984.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 4, 2017 23:59
To: amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: StDenis, Tom
Subject: [RFC]: More robust build sys for UMR

Keeping with the tradition of changing the build system on initial
release, here we go again.. This follow series introduces the cmake
build system that is intended to be a little more robust across
various distros and presumably the BSD's also. The installation
prefix is configurable in the usual cmake way:

Please kindly review,

Edward O'Callaghan (4):
 [PATCH 1/4] cmake_modules: Add libpciaccess finder
 [PATCH 2/4] cmake: Initial build system
 [PATCH 3/4] README: minor update for cmake buildsys
 [PATCH 4/4] drop orginal Makefile && stub bin/ directory

amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org<mailto:amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/attachments/20170205/03be32d0/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OutlookEmoji-😊.png
Type: image/png
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OutlookEmoji-😊.png
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/attachments/20170205/03be32d0/attachment-0001.png>

More information about the amd-gfx mailing list