Re: Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

[John Kehayias]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Monday, July 19th, 2021 at 8:24 AM, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net> 
wrote:

> John Kehayias john.kehayias@protonmail.com writes:
>
> > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> >
> > On Monday, July 12th, 2021 at 11:22 AM, John Kehayias
> >
> > john.kehayias@protonmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Just pinging here. If there are no good reasons not to, I think
> > >
> > > we should move ahead with getting libdrm and Mesa up to date,
> > >
> > > with https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49412 and
> > >
> > > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 We can work on moving to
> > >
> > > libglvnd as a separate patch series.
> > >
> > > Anyone have some thoughts or can these be pushed (to
> > >
> > > core-updates)?
> >
> > As an update, both the libdrm and Mesa patches are ready. Given
> >
> > the work for libglvnd that needs to be done, I think that should
> >
> > be on a separate patch series.
> >
> > Will these updates be merged before the core-updates freeze?
>
> We could also create a new branch to better track how the
>
> mesa/libdrm upgrades affect packages.
>

Hi Ricardo,

Is there something we anticipate breaking with a mesa/libdrm update? I've built 
xorg and some WMs and didn't run across anything. I don't recall any breaking 
changes in release notes. I thought this would be handled as part of 
core-updates and the process there? (Please correct me if I'm wrong, still new 
here!)

If you meant for a future move to libglvnd, discussion on the Mesa patch at 
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 had at least one person using libglvnd and 
looks like only a limited number of packages that would need updates to build. 
But we could address the need for a branch there if it seems needed to make 
many changes or if we run into any problems.

Anyway, it was pointed out I neglected to have the revised patch for Mesa at 
https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 so let me send that there now.

John