<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Chromium complains about glXGetSyncValuesOML in 13.0.2" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98964#c12">Comment # 12</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Chromium complains about glXGetSyncValuesOML in 13.0.2" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98964">bug 98964</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:zboszor@pr.hu" title="Zoltán Böszörményi <zboszor@pr.hu>"> Zoltán Böszörményi</a> <pre>(In reply to Emil Velikov from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=98964#c11">comment #11</a>) > Above all: yes using hard links is nasty. Thanks for confirming. :-) > If you're having a single (or multiple fixed) GPU system then building > multiple drivers is a _very_ bad idea. If you're doing that for embedded > systems then it gets even worse. Thus having separate $driver subpackages > makes no sense :-( I never said it is the same machine all across the board. All of them are single GPU ones, but historically we have systems with: AMD RS780 NVIDIA (ION1, ION2 and some third one, for our workload, Nouveau is enough) AMD Kabini AMD Kaveri Intel D525 Most recently Intel J1900 The same OS must run on all of them, so it does make sense to build different drivers into Mesa but it was also a necessity to save space where we can. Hence the symlink solution. Custom made OS based on Yocto. Even if the hardlinks are used, bitbake in Yocto has a separate packaging stage after "make install" that copies files instead of moving them so even a single subpackage containing all drivers would end up with broken hardlinks, thus requiring multiples of what is needed solely for the gallium_dri.so and mesa_dri_drivers.so megadrivers. Maybe the megadrivers idea is the elephant in the room. I know it was created for a miniscule performance gain.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>