Subject: RE: building a static, indirect-only libGL--worth it?
To: Blair Sadewitz <email@example.com>
From: De Zeurkous <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/08/2007 14:53:55
On Sat, December 8, 2007 14:28, Blair Sadewitz wrote:
> P.S. in <git://people.freedesktop.org/~dbn/mesa>,
> there is an "autoconf2" branch with the beginnings of autoconf support
> for mesa, just in case anyone's interested. Ultimately, I'd like to
> incorporate this work and use BSD makefiles and libtool along with it.
> When I saw that they were using it to provide options for Mesa's
> mklib script, my head hurt! ;)
Since we have enough autoshit and libfool crap already, I can understand
your head condition.
# Proud -net.kook- IRC bot overengineer
% NetBSD, zsh, twm, nvi and roff junkie
From the fool file:
I don't see why the way people have historically partitioned disks should
dictate which kernels we build and distribute by default in the future.
--Darren Reed (darrenr@NetBSD.org), NetBSD tech-kern