Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 22:02:06 -0500 From: Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Mesa3 port upgrade Message-ID: <20000227220206.C17085@shadow.blackdawn.com> In-Reply-To: <vqc4sauozzo.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from asami@FreeBSD.org on Sun, Feb 27, 2000 at 05:52:11PM -0800 References: <20000227194404.A17085@shadow.blackdawn.com> <vqc4sauozzo.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 27, 2000 at 05:52:11PM -0800, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > * -ports, > > ;) What?? :-) > What happens if they call "-lGL -lMesaGL" or something? Will that be > ok because all the symbols will be found in the first -l and the > second one will not be used at all? gltron seems to be OK with this. I even tried it in the reverse order. <1 5041-0> (00-02-27 21:52:56) [root@shadow /usr/ports/games/gltron]# make ===> Building for gltron-0.53 cc -O -pipe -o gltron sgi_texture.o switchCallbacks.o gui.o pause.o computer.o engine.o gltron.o graphics.o gamegraphics.o input.o settings.o texture.o fonttex.o fonts.o menu.o file.o model.o modelgraphics.o mtllib.o geom.o -lGL -lGLU -lglut -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lX11 -lXext -lXmu -lXt -lXi -lSM -lICE -lm -lMesaGL <1 5042-0> (00-02-27 21:52:58) [root@shadow /usr/ports/games/gltron]# <1 5049-1> (00-02-27 21:56:26) [root@shadow /usr/ports/games/gltron/work/gltron-0.53]# gmake cc -O2 -o gltron sgi_texture.o switchCallbacks.o gui.o pause.o computer.o engine.o gltron.o graphics.o gamegraphics.o input.o settings.o texture.o fonttex.o fonts.o menu.o file.o model.o modelgraphics.o mtllib.o geom.o -lMesaGL -lMesaGLU -lGL -lGLU -lglut -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lX11 -lXext -lXmu -lXt -lXi -lSM -lICE -lm -lMesaGL <1 5050-0> (00-02-27 21:56:28) [root@shadow /usr/ports/games/gltron/work/gltron-0.53]# Both of the above work fine. So I imagine order isn't important, nor whether or not somebody puts multiple instances of either library. I also played the game for a moment. If you wish, I can rebuild qt145, which should be a good enough test, but I think that if gltron is OK with it, other things should be fine too. > * Now, I know a few people are going to point out that this upgrade is a > * little risky being so close to the ports freeze, but it's been a long > * time since Mesa has been upgraded, and I feel that 4.0-RELEASE should go > * out with a brand-new Mesa port. > > More like 4.0R shouldn't go out with a ridiculously old Mesa port? :) Yeah. :-) > Anyway, if you actually tested some apps (not just linking I hope, but > real testing as in firing up the programs and seeing if they work) and > they seem ok, I don't see why we can't upgrade Mesa right now. At > least that will leave us a few days to track down any problems that > might surface. *nod* I'm still in the final stages of testing the upgrade, but I should be done within the hour.. I dunno why it seems to desire installing *.la library files even though USE_LIBTOOL is defined. I'll probably leave that to libtool experts (which I am definitely NOT). P.S. please don't comment on how long my prompt is. ;) -- Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000227220206.C17085>