| Summary: | build broken for x11 egl apps | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Mesa | Reporter: | Tapani Pälli <lemody> |
| Component: | EGL | Assignee: | Tapani Pälli <lemody> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | critical | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | chadversary, samuel.thibault |
| Version: | git | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||
| Attachments: |
fix
patch to fix the issue patch to fix the issue |
||
|
Description
Tapani Pälli
2013-11-27 08:35:48 UTC
More specifically, building mesa like this: ./autogen.sh --enable-gles2 --with-egl-platforms=x11 does not result in having a working egl and gles2 implementation. Reverting a594cec7e3ef275c386054127a357110a19dd823 fixes the situation. Created attachment 89891 [details] [review] fix Could you try the attached patch? I wasn't completely sure whether dri2_authenticate was supposed to fail or not when drm is not compiled in. By looking more, since this is the client side, and dri2_authenticated is store in the structure, it seems returning true is the right way. Created attachment 89892 [details]
patch to fix the issue
This patch adds additional HAVE_LIBDRM for x11_platform to compile correctly.
(In reply to comment #2) > Created attachment 89891 [details] [review] [review] > fix > > Could you try the attached patch? > > I wasn't completely sure whether dri2_authenticate was supposed to fail or > not when drm is not compiled in. By looking more, since this is the client > side, and dri2_authenticated is store in the structure, it seems returning > true is the right way. This does not do the trick, I want to use platform_x11 with libdrm but not having HAVE_DRM_PLATFORM since that is for gbm backend. I've attached a patch that fixes this issue for me. Ok, but I guess both patches are needed actually, because otherwise a completely-non-drm build would have a similar issue? (In reply to comment #5) > Ok, but I guess both patches are needed actually, because otherwise a > completely-non-drm build would have a similar issue? Yep, probably so. What is the type of build you are doing (non-drm and ...) so I could test that also? I'll need to fix my patch, it seems it actually does not work correctly yet. Created attachment 89893 [details] [review] patch to fix the issue The type of build I'm doing is with no drm at all, i.e. the drm headers are not installed at all (which is what was making the build fail previously). (In reply to comment #8) > The type of build I'm doing is with no drm at all, i.e. the drm headers are > not installed at all (which is what was making the build fail previously). ok, could you test with these 2 patches if you are able to run apps successfully with that build? CC Chad to review this was fixed by a057b837ddd1c725a7504eedc53c6df05a012773 |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.