ogl-sample
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ogl-sample] Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Re: Thanxs for SGI's GLU 1.3 libs !

To: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ogl-sample] Re: [Mesa3d-dev] Re: Thanxs for SGI's GLU 1.3 libs !
From: "Stephen J Baker" <sjbaker@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 07:42:49 -0600 (CST)
Cc: Brian Paul <brianp@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Olivier Michel <Olivier.Michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, mesa-dev <mesa3d-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <00112723405601.00861@phalanx>
Reply-to: ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-ogl-sample@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Sven Goethel wrote:

> Aehem, well, but how about splitting the Mesa distribution from:
>       MesaLib & MesaDemos
> to:
>       MesaLib & (MesaSGIGLU || MesaGLU) & MesaDemos
> 
> where, of course, the MesaSGIGLU is preferred ..
 
If there are going to be ugly issues with which C++ runtime library
SGI-GLU pulls-in/requires then I think it's vital from an application
support perspective to minimise the number of varients there can
be out there.  I would not want to see (say) Debian and RedHat shipping
the SGI version of GLU with SuSE and Corel shipping GLU-classic.

I'd also oppose splitting GLU off from Mesa's main download because
that will result in lots of end-users installing "Mesa" and yet having
no valid GLU implementation because they failed to download/install it.

Supporting OpenGL applications under Linux is hard enough as it is -
look at the mail archives for an active OpenGL application (TuxRacer
for example) and you'll see that at least 95% of the posts are OpenGL
installation problems of one kind or another.  That consumes an insane
amount of people's time - PLEASE, let's not make it any harder.

IMHO, 99% of widely distributed OpenGL apps for Linux will not be
using the problematic functions in GLU-classic - because those programs
were almost certainly developed using that library and either don't use
the broken functions or have work-arounds that work OK. Hence most
existing applications will get no benefit from SGI-GLU.  In any case,
the kinds of applications that need things like tesselators and spline
patches tend not to be games - more often they are things like scientific
visualisers and custom applications which are not widely circulated.

Hence, I suggest that until the g++ standard library stuff settles
A
down, we avoid making SGI-GLU the default.  I think the Mesa documentation
should point out that we *WILL* make the transition - but not yet - and
advise people who experience problems with GLU-classic to switch over
immediately.  Meanwhile I think we should continue to ship GLU-classic
by default.

---
Steve Baker                      (817)619-2657 (Vox/Vox-Mail)
L3Com/Link Simulation & Training (817)619-2466 (Fax)
Work: sjbaker@xxxxxxxx           http://www.link.com
Home: sjbaker1@xxxxxxxxxxx       http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1


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