[Bug 1609110] Re: Do we still need the mesa or mesa-egl directories in /usr/lib/<arch>?
Ubuntu Foundations Team Bug Bot
1609110 at bugs.launchpad.net
Fri Aug 5 00:29:16 UTC 2016
The attachment "Drop libGL.so symlink" seems to be a debdiff. The
ubuntu-sponsors team has been subscribed to the bug report so that they
can review and hopefully sponsor the debdiff. If the attachment isn't a
patch, please remove the "patch" flag from the attachment, remove the
"patch" tag, and if you are member of the ~ubuntu-sponsors, unsubscribe
the team.
[This is an automated message performed by a Launchpad user owned by
~brian-murray, for any issue please contact him.]
** Tags added: patch
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Sponsors Team, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1609110
Title:
Do we still need the mesa or mesa-egl directories in /usr/lib/<arch>?
Status in mesa package in Ubuntu:
New
Bug description:
One of our mesa changes means we can't sync Wine packages (or wine-
development stuck in proposed) from Debian. See bug:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=827770
We purposely end up creating in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu
mesa/ld.so.conf
mesa/libGL.so -> libGL.so.1.2.0
mesa/libGL.so.1 -> libGL.so.1.2.0
mesa/libGL.so.1.2.0
libGL.so -> mesa/libGL.so
Debian on the other hand just creates:
libGL.so.1 -> libGL.so.1.2.0
libGL.so.1.2.0
I haven't found a clear reason for the divergence. I do see some
comments about making it work with the alternates system. I'm not sure
if that's current though. Long term libglvnd should help there in a
better way (IIUC).
For reference Fedora does:
/usr/lib64/libGL.so.1
/usr/lib64/libGL.so.1.2.0
Can we drop these Debian differences from mesa for Yakkety?
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mesa/+bug/1609110/+subscriptions
More information about the Ubuntu-sponsors
mailing list