[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 01/15] mesa: Add toplevel Android.mk

[Dan Nicholson]

On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Chad Versace <chad at chad-versace.us> wrote:
> On 08/04/2011 04:17 PM, Jose Fonseca wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Chad Versace <chad at chad-versace.us>
>>> wrote:
>>>> This is the first step in porting libGLES* and libEGL to Android.
>>>>
>>>> The makefile doesn't build anything yet; it just defines common
>>>> variables.
>>>>
>>>> The values for MESA_COMMON_C_FLAGS and MESA_COMMON_CPP_FLAGS, I
>>>> obtained
>>>> by invoking autogen.sh with the options below and then inspecting
>>>> MESA_TOP/configs/autoconf. My immediate goal is to port i965 to
>>>> Android,
>>>> so I used the typical flags for building i965.
>>>>    --disable-gallium
>>>>    --disable-glu
>>>>    --disable-glw
>>>>    --disable-glut
>>>>    --enable-32-bit
>>>>    --enable-egl
>>>>    --enable-gles2
>>>>    --enable-gles1
>>>>    --enable-texture-float
>>>>    --with-dri-drivers=i965
>>>>    --with-gallium-drivers=
>>>>
>>>> Note: This is in preparation for porting i965 to Android.
>>>> CC: Chia-I Wu <olv at lunarg.com>,
>>>> CC: Chih-Wei Huang <cwhuang at android-x86.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chad Versace <chad at chad-versace.us>
>>>> ---
>>>>  Android.mk                 |   66
>>>>  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  android/mesa_local_vars.mk |   32 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  2 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>  create mode 100644 Android.mk
>>>>  create mode 100644 android/mesa_local_vars.mk
>>>
>>> There's quite a bit of new build infrastructure here. What would it
>>> take to fit this into either the existing autoconf support or add a
>>> targeted configs/android? Duplicating a pile of make targets and
>>> adding another way to configure/build mesa seems like it might not be
>>> the best way to go. What are the current constraints that make
>>> building mesa on android difficult?
>>
>> I agree. I'd prefer not have yet another build infrastructure in the mix, unless there's a very good reason.
>>
>> Jose
>
> I also agree. I would prefer to not add another build system to Mesa. We have
> too many as it is.
>
> To address Dan's questions, the Android build cannot be fitted into autoconf or
> configs/android. I explored this option, and discovered that it was impossible.
> The Android build system is... well... interesting. Allow me to explain.
>
> The entirety of the Android project --- libc, webkit, the window manager,
> *everything* --- exists in a single source tree [1]. And that source tree is
> built with a single, non-recursive invocation of make. Every time I say that, I
> find it hard to believe myself, so I'll say it again: The entirety of the
> Android OS, all core libraries and apps, are built with a single, non-recursive
> invocation of make. (The kernel is the special exception to this
> all-encompassing build). The final build artifact is a bootable iso image.
>
> [1] http://android.git.kernel.org/

Looking at all those git repos, wouldn't this be more appropriate as
an android project? platform/external/mesa or something? I haven't
seen any Android.mk files show up in freetype or expat or anything
like that. In the same way, mesa doesn't carry a debian folder even
though that's how debian and ubuntu build mesa. Certainly if there are
fixes to the existing build infrastructure that help get mesa built on
android, that should be done, but I don't see why we should carry the
android build bits in upstream mesa.

--
Dan