[Mesa-dev] [RFC libdrm 0/2] Replace the build system with meson

[Jonathan Gray]

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 04:00:37PM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 08:28:22AM +1100, Timothy Arceri wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 21/03/17 06:39, Emil Velikov wrote:
> > > On 20 March 2017 at 18:30, Matt Turner <mattst88 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Seems like we ended up all over the place, so let me try afresh.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Above all:
> > > > >  - Saying "I don't care" about your users is arrogant - let us _not_
> > > > > do that, please ?
> > > > 
> > > > Let's be honest, the OpenBSD is subjecting itself to some pretty
> > > > arbitrary restrictions caused including Mesa in its core: 10+ year old
> > > > GCC,
> > > IIRC Brian was using old MinGW GCC, which was one of the blockers - it
> > > wasn't OpenBSD to blame here ;-)
> > 
> > Sorry Emil I probably wasn't clear in our discussion. I sent out patches to
> > switch to GCC 4.8 last Sept (I believe this was needed by RHEL6) [1].
> > 
> > Brain jumped in and said "I'm still using the MinGW gcc 4.6 compiler. I'd
> > rather not go through the upgrade hassle if I don't have to."
> > 
> > Followed by Jose "We're internally building and shipping Mesa compiled with
> > GCC 4.4 (more specifically 4.4.3).
> > 
> > It's fine if you require GCC 4.8 on automake, but please leave support
> > for GCC 4.4.x in SCons."
> > 
> > By this point I got bored and moved on. But OpenBSDs GCC is a fork with
> > various features backported, from what I understand Mesa would not build on
> > a real GCC 4.2 release and we should not be using it as a min version. IMO
> > if OpenBSD want to maintain a GCC fork they can handle a patch to downgrade
> > the min GCC version.
> > 
> > I believe Jonathan would like us to stick with 4.2 as min but is prepared to
> > deal with it if we move on.
> 
> I would like to see Mesa test features it uses in configure rather than
> arbitary versions that are what a certain linux distribution ships with.
> The zlib change for instance didn't reference any specific problems with
> older versions or interfaces required from newer versions.
> 
> We have one platform using clang/lld now (arm64) and are likely to move
> others in future where possible.  libtool has to be patched and the Mesa
> configure script regenerated to make this work or Mesa won't build due
> to libtool.m4 looking for specific strings in ld -v produced by bfd
> binutils or gold...
> 
> And yes if you change the configure script to check for a newer version
> I'll revert it locally like I did with the zlib one.
> 
> As I get the impression no one cares about patches for older GCC I've
> not being sending them to the list, ie

And to be clear this is code in Mesa violating the C++ standard
according to clang++ --std=c++14 -pedantic.

compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:589:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_POINTS] =_3DPRIM_POINTLIST,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:590:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_LINES] = _3DPRIM_LINELIST,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:591:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_LINE_LOOP] = _3DPRIM_LINELOOP,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:592:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_LINE_STRIP] = _3DPRIM_LINESTRIP,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:593:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_TRIANGLES] = _3DPRIM_TRILIST,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:594:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP] = _3DPRIM_TRISTRIP,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:595:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_TRIANGLE_FAN] = _3DPRIM_TRIFAN,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:596:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_QUADS] = _3DPRIM_QUADLIST,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:597:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_QUAD_STRIP] = _3DPRIM_QUADSTRIP,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:598:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_POLYGON] = _3DPRIM_POLYGON,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:599:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_LINES_ADJACENCY] = _3DPRIM_LINELIST_ADJ,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:600:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_LINE_STRIP_ADJACENCY] = _3DPRIM_LINESTRIP_ADJ,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:601:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_TRIANGLES_ADJACENCY] = _3DPRIM_TRILIST_ADJ,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compiler/brw_vec4_gs_visitor.cpp:602:4: warning: designated initializers are a C99 feature [-Wc99-extensions]
   [GL_TRIANGLE_STRIP_ADJACENCY] = _3DPRIM_TRISTRIP_ADJ,
   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~