Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:34:21 +0100
From:      Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
To:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, x11@FreeBSD.org, John Hein <jhein@symmetricom.com>
Subject:   Re: Fix nvidia-like ports, help needed
Message-ID:  <20120223093421.Horde.oN2FMZjmRSRPRfoNKQ4BA-g@webmail.leidinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120223072132.GB88092@azathoth.lan>
References:  <20120222222544.GA88092@azathoth.lan> <20293.31720.350021.74506@gromit.timing.com> <20120223013502.GA78308@FreeBSD.org> <20120223072132.GB88092@azathoth.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> (from Thu, 23 Feb 2012  
08:21:33 +0100):

> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 01:35:02AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 04:36:08PM -0700, John Hein wrote:
>> > One of the issues with 'alternatives' implementations is that they are
>> > not selectable per-user (including non superuser).
>> >
>> > In this particular case (libGL), also what about the native X server
>> > vs. virtual X servers that support using the mesa lib (per-application
>> > selection)?
>> >
>> > In addition to something like alternatives, another option is to allow
>> > installation of conflicting files (like libGL.so in this case) to
>> > separate directories and specify which to use using a path (like
>> > LD_LIBRARY_PATH or rpath at compile time).  That can help with the
>> > aforementioned per-user and per-application variation.
>> >
>> > Personally, I prefer the "path" method over something like alternative
>> > sym links (e.g., debian/redhat alternatives).  There can still be a
>> > front-end tool to get at the "alternates" configuration information,
>> > but I like the ability to set a path rather than a sym link.
>>
>> I tend to agree.  While I currently do not see clearly the best solution to
>> the problem, when I see "etc/alternative.d" I want to unsee it ASAP.
>>
>> For nvidia driver, it might be easier to simply provide a knob in
>> xorg-server and libGL and perhaps register a dependency on nvidia-driver;
>> no need to invent some cumbersome framework.
>
> Why not but which package will provide the libGL.so file? in all  
> case the users
> might need to be able to switch the libGL.so file from the nvidia one to the
> mesa one, what would a user have to do for that, in particular a  
> user using only
> binary packages where a file can't belong to 2 different packages without
> conflicting?
>
> if someone have a better solution than a framework for that I'm open  
> but no the
> knob is not a solution for package people.

Do you havea list of packages which overzrite something, respectively  
do you have a list of files which are overwriten?

If we just talk about the nvidia lib, installing the mesa and nvidia  
ones into subdirectories and asking to add (or adding  
automatically/optionally) ldconfig_paths="$ldconfig_paths  
/usr/local/lib/<port>-gl/" to rc.conf could be an option.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.
		-- Wittgenstein

http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120223093421.Horde.oN2FMZjmRSRPRfoNKQ4BA-g>