<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED DUPLICATE - GLX and OpenGL should be separated" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95079#c4">Comment # 4</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED DUPLICATE - GLX and OpenGL should be separated" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95079">bug 95079</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:emil.l.velikov@gmail.com" title="Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com>"> Emil Velikov</a> <pre>(In reply to Cédric Legrand from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=95079#c3">comment #3</a>) > I'm sorry if I'm wrong, I don't know a lot of things about OpenGL > implementation, but here are the facts: > * Wayland EGL won't create an OpenGL context. All OpenGL functions are NULL > when I try, only OpenGL ES is working. From the Wayland FAQ, this is because > Linux OpenGL implementation is bound to GLX > (<a href="https://wayland.freedesktop.org/faq.html#heading_toc_j_12">https://wayland.freedesktop.org/faq.html#heading_toc_j_12</a>). You can create OpenGL context with EGL as of version 1.2. The latter was released/specced in 2005... some 11 years ago ;-) > * Mesa is only providing a libGL for both APIs > * Nvidia is providing separated libraries with what seems to be a wrapper (I > think for the historical reasons you are talking about), as I described in > my first post. > Nvidia is shipping the alpha/beta version of the GLVND "library" (it's a collection of libraries as you can see). > I must admit that I don't know if the problem comes from the standards, the > implementation or Wayland design, nor why exactly Nvidia did it this way. > Just google "GLVND XDC". The Nvidia folks have a few presentations on the topic. > By the way, as I see it, having them split would allow package maintainers > to provide a version of Mesa without libX11 dependency. At the moment, > libX11 is almost required, even on a Wayland/Mir system, but this will > become less and less the case over time, until the day both worlds will be > totally separated (and maybe X11 considered as deprecated). Possible deprecation of libX11 and/or alike has nothing to do with using OpenGL. I would welcome that you familiarise yourself with how mesa is build/packaged. If done properly you can use wayland/mir/foo without anything X related. If you spot that something is stopping you - please open bugs reports. I gladly look into them. > This day, Mesa > maintainers would have to ship two versions of the package: a mesa-gl > without GLX, and a mesa-gl-compat with GLX, conflicting each other. With a > split, libGL would be either a symlink to libOpenGL or a wrapper around > libGLX and libOpenGL. > So this is what brought you here. Distro maintainers, have shipped thing in a way that seems awkward/conflicting. I feel your pain... I was there so I had to move away to [a few] custom made packages years ago ;-) > > One can use OpenGL even if libGL is not present on the system > Seems difficult, isn't actually libGL the OpenGL provider? > > As I said, I'm not turned into this, so I may be totally wrong. In this > case, I would appreciate to know what I got wrong. > As said above - EGL can give you a OpenGL context. > PS: I'm sorry if my English is not perfect, as my name stands I'm a > Frenchie... Your English is quite fine. If anything I might have made more mistakes. TL;DR; It's being looked into. Rewriting ~70% on the mesa side and having to rework dozens of things within upstream GLVND takes some time.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>