[Mesa-users] Building Alternate Mesa

[Brian Paul]

Running 'ldd glxinfo' will confirm if the right libGL.so is being chosen.

Then setting LIBGL_DEBUG=verbose will tell you which driver .so is being 
loaded.

-Brian



On 02/24/2017 09:18 AM, Dan Allen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I had set these variables when the result was as originally described.
>
> For information, I used --prefix=/opt/mesa during configure and then
> sudo make install after compilation. I then used export
> LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH=/opt/mesa/lib/dri and export
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/mesa/lib.
>
>
> On 24/02/17 14:29, Brian Paul wrote:
>> On 02/22/2017 12:48 PM, Dan Allen wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I would like to build/install a different version of Mesa on my system
>>> to trial it (i.e. without completely installing it in place of the
>>> currently installed version).  Is this possible?
>>>
>>> I am currently running Ubuntu 16.10 x64.
>>>
>>> I found this information
>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pkg-2Dxorg.alioth.debian.org_howto_build-2Dmesa.html&d=DwIGaQ&c=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=Ie7_encNUsqxbSRbqbNgofw0ITcfE8JKfaUjIQhncGA&m=XR89-1h11mUG_eYyOU_v3dMRxW93u1tW5gWhztCSUGc&s=bAU-invF1ZYoUFlr0UwlXeif3Cwj38EH0zNA9Qm8r9g&e=
>>>
>>> and followed most of it (I downloaded the version I wanted (12.0.6)
>>> rather than git clone).  It compiled fine etc.  However, when I execute
>>> glxinfo in terminal, the output is not as expected.  For example, the
>>> max core profile version is stated as "0.0" and the OpenGL version
>>> string is "2.1 Mesa 12.0.6".  For my hardware, I would expect this to be
>>> "3.3" and "3.0 Mesa 12.0.6" respectively.
>>>
>>> Could anyone point me in the right direction to get this working?
>>
>> You probably just need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH and LIBGL_DRIVERS_PATH
>> to point to the newly compiled libs.
>>
>> -Brian
>>
>>
>