From owner-freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Wed Feb 22 17:24:20 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17EE6CE9623 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emil.l.velikov@gmail.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBAC1A7 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emil.l.velikov@gmail.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id E82B0CE9622; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: x11@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7CA2CE9621 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emil.l.velikov@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wr0-x244.google.com (mail-wr0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7EAF41A6; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from emil.l.velikov@gmail.com) Received: by mail-wr0-x244.google.com with SMTP id q39so1199686wrb.2; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:24:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=xjLdiRz4FDCC6FEJoNwX1h89KfJ7dvRQKMgdU8GHIkI=; b=fB7DAeJLzP6eOwMLSU13xgchkNPQ5XNyVIpSHOl7WnP1wUYiS/FKes+Qzg1BQMfhUj 7t21U8jA9noeBtoG+MPCZgdeQlRjmJDIYPbtl2wd6EBFXCHBA6Swe4ryV8YdGbh5asju gd/hhz29uPPnjeM54sTBsJO0dph10TdUAZ4h4TJ+HibYBSXv3O+Z94cB51gy07LwEt4h KgDsItVULD1r8hd9yerYg2cRF0oj116qNB7p/DJJChupxuNifEb9RZdkZ5X/9n9qyylR Ps0JXOjJ6dy0KATzFfTajyedFFrH1Gq7xR37UDFA+DKQOvniIp4kUnKDUrGxtxsPJDMO bBJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=xjLdiRz4FDCC6FEJoNwX1h89KfJ7dvRQKMgdU8GHIkI=; b=AdyulCulsvHB1pc15TfaJZ1e2fiPU53dX+2GAScVL6s/G60zm/n3dbbIXt8kdxJtMW 9tlEqfO8Vti+TRlj3IW467+ClS1q8ckyTAGMCjyXf2s/CpfDWQ831t5xGTQ5vQ8fkse7 9ekpD9Ov6CdideDjbFn/dR6tdcqkGKV+svRVmD+msQOrRSFuOrCfIrgRTORRVgeJ6erw Q0Ca71EbTfjad53O+jhp6m+BtDELSs3EcmjGeEhFpvG4j35E7NeaCzMea3KYtWMSlgyp 8drdKK0cxIEhKi6vboJ9HEWUTBJ2ulbvnOcbu3inKBKGcVlFeQ4fpU5DOqctNYLsjYCF zjJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mjCTDacB0yux1bVO/sLK0/RjroI365QmjipJFbFiQxdOTQHF6OoisprjPEHEmBBzee23/k8cN3+9Iq4w== X-Received: by 10.223.170.214 with SMTP id i22mr4811026wrc.131.1487784257830; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:24:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.194.214 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:24:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3635692.Vys3mgEcQY@workstation.reztek> References: <20170222120828.zkrfh56swen7r44o@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <3635692.Vys3mgEcQY@workstation.reztek> From: Emil Velikov Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:17 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: your mail To: Matthew Rezny Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , Steve Wills , x11@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:24:20 -0000 On 22 February 2017 at 14:46, Matthew Rezny wrote: > On Wednesday 22 February 2017 14:36:36 Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 22 February 2017 at 12:08, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:00:58PM +0000, Emil Velikov wrote: >> >> Hi gents, >> >> >> >> >> >> My name is Emil Velikov and for a while I've been taking care of >> >> libdrm and Mesa. >> >> >> >> I can see that there is some activity on the above in FreeBSD so I'll >> >> kindly ask that you send [every and any] changes upstream ;-) >> >> Please try to keep different [logical] changes into separate patches >> >> and git send-email them to the mailing lists [1] [2]. >> >> >> >> This includes [but not limited to] the prefix fix for drirc, \< and >> >> shebang workarounds in [3]. But also covers `sed s|x86_64|amd64|' >> >> "GNU_CONFIGURE = yes" and various USES [gmake, bison, python etc.] >> >> >> >> In a gist, things should just work: >> >> - no need for gnumake - any POSIX make should work >> >> - flex/bison/python/etc are not needed when building from tarballs >> >> >> >> If you need to patch and/or add _any_ workaround in your Makefile, >> >> please file a bug and let us/me know. >> >> >> >> >> >> Finally, I would like to invite you (maybe subscribe x11@FreeBSD.org >> >> ?) to the [4] list. >> >> It's very low volume and covers topics for maintainers' eyes. Most >> >> recent of which "pthread-stubs design is broken" [5]. >> > >> > First thank you for contacting us. >> > Yes upstreaming as always been the plan. We still have to first make up >> > our mind on how we deal with the libudev dependency either through our >> > home baked equivalent or via a heavily modified libudev >> >> With Mesa 13.0.0 the triple libudev/sysfs/libdrm codepaths were >> merged. I've pulled a helper to libdrm to deal with that. >> Personally I'd suggest keeping all the chaos in there. >> > As of Mesa 13 we do let libdrm handle that (no more patches to Mesa for it), > but we are patching in support for libdevq, a minimal alternative to libudev. > Now that we also have libudev-devd, a partial implementation of libudev atop > devd, we need to reconsider libdevq's existence. > Merely pointing out that there should be no reason why to have any such platform specifics in Mesa. If something does flag up - shout ! >> For 17.0.0 we also removed the --with-sha1 'fun' heuristics. That and >> more can be found on the mesa-maintainers@ ;-) >> >> > In the meantime we can work on upstreaming all other parts :) >> >> Yes, please. >> > It has been my intent to upstream as much as possible, but I was trying to get > us caught up to current before doing so. No point in submitting a patch for a > section of code that may be gone in the next version after all. Differences in > build system is lower priority, top will be the patches that were required to > avoid compiler errors (several bits in clover did not compile on any version > of LLVM/Clang I tried without patching), which should be reviewed. > You really do not want to waste time doing the same work multiple times :-) Just send anything and everything as soon as possible - even alongside the initial FreeBSD submission, please ? Otherwise BSD (in general) will never get out of this constant game of chase. Fwiw I'm looking at some of the shebang stuff atm - most/all of that is dead code and I'll just nuke it ;-) Thanks Emil