Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 17:48:27 -0700 From: Eric Anholt <eta@lclark.edu> To: jon@witchspace.com Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mesa verses Mesa3? Message-ID: <1063586906.634.232.camel@leguin> In-Reply-To: <1379.192.168.0.1.1063536820.squirrel@webmail.witchspace.com> References: <1379.192.168.0.1.1063536820.squirrel@webmail.witchspace.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2003-09-14 at 03:53, jon@witchspace.com wrote: > Hiya > > > I was just wondering why there are separate ports for mesagl and Mesa3... > Ports requiring Mesa all seem to want Mesa3, is there any reason to prefer > that over the other? You should probably be using XFree86 4.x, which means the only thing the two mesa packages provide you are libglut, which I don't think has changed much. Our Mesa packages really need to get cleaned up I think. I have split-out ports for libglut and mesa-demos from 5.0.2 ready, I think, and I'm working on updating mesagl to 5.0.2 and making it only build for XFree86 3.3.x users. In the process, I'll update the USE_MESAing ports to point to libglut if necessary, update USE_MESA to point to mesagl, and retire Mesa3 unless there are objections. Hopefully I'll have time to do this after the ports freeze ends. -- Eric Anholt eta@lclark.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1063586906.634.232.camel>