[Mesa-dev] [PATCH-RFC] autoconf: add --enable-{dri,glx,osmesa}

[Kenneth Graunke]

On 06/27/2011 12:17 PM, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Chia-I Wu<olvaffe at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> From: Chia-I Wu<olv at lunarg.com>
>>
>> The idea is that DRI driver, libGL and libOSMesa are libraries that can
>> be independently enabled, yet --with-driver does not allow us to easily
>> do that, if not impossible.  This also matches what
>> --enable-{egl,xorg,d3d1x} do for the respective libraries.
>
> I haven't read this in any detail, but I definitely like the idea.
> When I originally wrote all this, I struggled to coordinate DRI vs.
> GLX, and I didn't really bother with the EGL code that was mostly
> experimental. This is much more coherently structured.
>
>> There are two libGL providers: Xlib-based and DRI-based.  They cannot
>> coexist.  To be able to choose between them, --enable-xlib-glx is also
>> added.
>
> This is the only part that kind of bugs me. It seems to me that the
> --enable-dri and --enable-xlib-glx options aren't really symmetric. I
> believe you'd need this to be --enable-dri-glx to really act as a
> provider. I can see why you didn't do that since dri is a "provider"
> to many of the APIs and would require a lot more hacking of
> configure.ac. Is my understanding of that correct? I'm not as familiar
> with the newer non-GL Mesa components.

How does --enable-xcb ("use XCB for GLX") fit in?  I've been using that 
for ages.  Why isn't it the default these days?  XCB isn't exactly 
cutting edge, and I believe we already use it for some DRI2 stuff.  Is 
there some Xlib-based stuff that still needs to be converted?  Can we 
just kill Xlib-GLX entirely?

I'm probably not understanding any of this...sorry :)

--Kenneth