<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Configure should not have hardcoded list of {dri,gallium} drivers" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93278#c5">Comment # 5</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED NOTABUG - Configure should not have hardcoded list of {dri,gallium} drivers" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93278">bug 93278</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:chris.arena@gmail.com" title="Chris Arena <chris.arena@gmail.com>"> Chris Arena</a> <pre>The remarkable thing about this was that an unlikely target and dependent library was picked by default. Cross compiling on an cubieboard for an Intel part is unlikely in the extreme. What is most likely is compiling for the cubieboard. Oftentimes, configure gets it perfectly right for doing something in the native environment without parameters. If the configure can't figure out what the user wants from something in the environment, defaulting to an unlikely case makes the user think that something is broken, as I did. It would make sense that once the "checking for INTEL... no" was emitted, no other diagnostics applicable to INTEL would be issued, such as "No package 'libdrm_intel' found". My reasoning is: intel isn't the platform, checking for a package required to support intel doesn't mean anything, so saying that it's missing doesn't add anything to the picture.</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>