ogl-sample
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ogl-sample] GLU SPECS file

To: Olivier.Michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ogl-sample] GLU SPECS file
From: Craig Dunwoody <dunwoody@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:19:31 -0700
Cc: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx, brianp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:25:09 +0200." <39D362D5.B2060228@cyberbotics.com>
Reply-to: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hi Olivier,

olivier.michel writes:
> I would like to submit my GLU rpm SPECS file so that it could be
> included (or merged) into the official tree of the OpenGL sample
> implementation. This would facilitate the port of GLU rpms to other
> platforms (I have done it for i386 and pcc but it could be done also
> for Sparc, Alpha, etc.). To who shall I send this rpm.spec file for
> submission ?

Please do send me the file.  I haven't fully formed an opinion on what
to do here.  The OpenGL-SI already has a GLU RPM spec file
(rpmspecs/oss-opengl-glu.spec), but I'm not sure how widely (if at
all) it has been used.

The default Red Hat Linux 7.0 workstation installation includes "Mesa"
and "Mesa-devel" RPMs, which include the Mesa implementation of the
GLU API.  The relatively coarse granularity of this packaging is
convenient in some ways, but it does make it more difficult for
developer-types to replace just one component (e.g. GLU), due to RPM
conflicts.

I would like to further explore longer-term OpenGL RPM packaging
options with folks who do this for some of the major distributions.

For now, I think it does make sense to put GLU RPMs (based on your
packaging) up on the Mesa site, for the convenience of developers.
I'm less certain how much of an impact would result from changing the
GLU RPM packaging provided by the OpenGL-SI, but I'll be happy to take
a look at it.

-c
Craig Dunwoody
dunwoody@xxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>