* Re: Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l?
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
@ 2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: st3r4g @ 2020-04-11 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 535 bytes --]
New comment by st3r4g on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861#issuecomment-612354520
Comment:
As for mesa, it seems that after version `17.1.8` (so in August 2017) the `vc4` driver was excluded from `armv6l` (the old package is still in the repo because someone forgot to purge it). If it works for you know it should be enabled.
The `armv7l` `mesa-vc4-dri-dbg` package should just be removed, we transitioned to a unified `mesa-dri` package, the debugging symbols are in `mesa-dri-dbg`
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l?
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
@ 2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
2020-04-11 7:28 ` st3r4g
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: st3r4g @ 2020-04-11 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 534 bytes --]
New comment by st3r4g on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861#issuecomment-612354520
Comment:
As for mesa, it seems that after version `17.1.8` (so in August 2017) the `vc4` driver was excluded from `armv6l` (the old package is still in the repo because someone forgot to purge it). If it works for you now it should be enabled.
The `armv7l` `mesa-vc4-dri-dbg` package should just be removed, we transitioned to a unified `mesa-dri` package, the debugging symbols are in `mesa-dri-dbg`
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l?
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
2020-04-11 7:26 ` st3r4g
@ 2020-04-11 7:28 ` st3r4g
2020-04-11 7:37 ` st3r4g
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: st3r4g @ 2020-04-11 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]
New comment by st3r4g on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861#issuecomment-612354520
Comment:
As for mesa, it seems that after version `17.1.8` (so in August 2017) the `vc4` driver was excluded from `armv6l` (the old package is still in the repo because someone forgot to purge it). If it works for you now it should be enabled.
The `armv7l` `mesa-vc4-dri-dbg` package (and all the other similar ones) should just be removed, we transitioned to a unified `mesa-dri` package, the debugging symbols are in `mesa-dri-dbg`
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l?
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-11 7:28 ` st3r4g
@ 2020-04-11 7:37 ` st3r4g
2020-04-11 7:38 ` st3r4g
2020-04-26 22:03 ` [ISSUE] [CLOSED] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? (Broken dependencies in packages due to this) ericonr
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: st3r4g @ 2020-04-11 7:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 620 bytes --]
New comment by st3r4g on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861#issuecomment-612354520
Comment:
As for mesa, it seems that after version `17.1.8` (so in August 2017, reference: 8f810eecb2230067a0024a08bbf8e0cb8c71f7cd) the `vc4` driver was excluded from `armv6l` (the old package is still in the repo because someone forgot to purge it). If it works for you now it should be enabled.
The `armv7l` `mesa-vc4-dri-dbg` package (and all the other similar ones) should just be removed, we transitioned to a unified `mesa-dri` package, the debugging symbols are in `mesa-dri-dbg`
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l?
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-11 7:37 ` st3r4g
@ 2020-04-11 7:38 ` st3r4g
2020-04-26 22:03 ` [ISSUE] [CLOSED] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? (Broken dependencies in packages due to this) ericonr
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: st3r4g @ 2020-04-11 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 625 bytes --]
New comment by st3r4g on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861#issuecomment-612354520
Comment:
As for mesa, it seems that after version `17.1.8` (so in August 2017, reference: 8f810eecb2230067a0024a08bbf8e0cb8c71f7cd) the `vc4` driver was excluded from `armv6l` (the old package is still in the repo because someone forgot to purge it). If it works for you now it should be enabled back.
The `armv7l` `mesa-vc4-dri-dbg` package (and all the other similar ones) should just be removed, we transitioned to a unified `mesa-dri` package, the debugging symbols are in `mesa-dri-dbg`
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [ISSUE] [CLOSED] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? (Broken dependencies in packages due to this)
2020-04-11 3:01 [ISSUE] Why aren't some graphics packages built for armv6l? ericonr
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-11 7:38 ` st3r4g
@ 2020-04-26 22:03 ` ericonr
5 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: ericonr @ 2020-04-26 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ml
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1742 bytes --]
Closed issue by ericonr on void-packages repository
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/issues/20861
Description:
### System
Void 4.19.113_1 armv6l-musl Unknown uptodate rFFFFF
### Expected behavior
All the packages necessary for a proper graphical session should be available for this arch.
### Actual behavior
At least these packages aren't built for it:
* complete `mesa-dri` subpackage (the VC4 driver is excluded)
* `xorg-server-xwayland` subpackage
Not building `xorg-server-xwayland` for it made it necessary to include an architecture check in `plasma-workspace`. This check isn't included in `sway`, making it impossible to install sway on armv6l, because it can't find the `xorg-server-xwayland` dependency.
One option is adding the same compatibility check to the `sway` package and others; another options is making some sort of external check for it, to avoid duplication; another (and IMO the best one) is fully removing the restriction on building `xorg-server-xwayland` to make it available for all archs (I don't know if there's an issue with that).
The lack of a complete `mesa-dri` package for armv6l makes it impossible to have a hardware accelerated session, even though the VC4 driver is fully supported by Mesa and works on an armv6l device. I have built it with the VC4 driver.
This restriction also led to some weird result with the armv6l repositories, where the `mesa-vc4-dri` package is still listed, even though it can't be installed due to mismatched dependencies. (For that matter, the dbg package for armv7l is also out dated).
I can make PRs for these issues, because I have already made some of the necessary changes in order to build these packages in my system.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread