Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

[John Kehayias]

Hi everyone,

Mesa has fallen quite of date (latest upstream is 21.1.4, guix core-updates up to 20.2.6, or else 20.2.4 for everyone else). There is patch available here: https://issues.guix.gnu.org/49339 however it currently includes enabling libglvnd. I don't think that is necessary from my testing, but does raise the question of moving to libglvnd for packages requiring GL (which would be needed if Mesa has it enabled).

As far as I understand it, libglvnd is meant to be vendor neutral and provide GL for anything to link to, and then hands off to vendor specific GL. I have at tested building some packages when mesa has libglvnd enabled, like libepoxy and xorg-server. Both needed libglvnd as inputs, but otherwise build fine. I haven't tested running as I'm currently on a foreign distro. However, does seem like this would be a good idea, as it should alleviate dealing with vendor specific GL in building packages. libglvnd is new to me, but perhaps someone can weigh in on this issue?

Anyway, my main goal right now is to have Mesa updated in core-updates before the upcoming freeze. Mesa is already very out of date, and would then push it to another ~6 months for the next core-updates when it is already ~7 months out of date (and they make quick releases for fixes in drivers and software that uses Mesa).

I can update #49339 with a minimal Mesa version bump patch if that helps, just don't want it to get lost in the current shuffle.

Thanks!
John

Re: Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

[John Kehayias]

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)?

Re: Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

[John Kehayias]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 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?

Re: Mesa out of date (and move to libglvnd?)

[Ricardo Wurmus]

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.

-- 
Ricardo

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