[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-openjfx-dev
Subject:    Re: RFR: 8232210: Update Mesa 3-D Headers to version 19.2.1
From:       Phil Race <prr () openjdk ! org>
Date:       2019-10-30 0:45:17
Message-ID: EFWYDvFGC4RMp4P1MKKe29d8C5tnXHBihi_KxSALo4A=.a571971d-09de-4766-b589-e6c09aa409e4 () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:43:08 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov <serb@openjdk.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 23:05:46 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr@openjdk.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 23:05:44 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > This PR updates the header files we use the build the OpenGL ES2 pipeline to \
> > > Mesa 19.2.1. See [this review \
> > > thread](https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2019-October/010372.html) \
> > > for the equivalent change that is under review for Java2D. 
> > > The updates to the `gl.h` and `glx.h` files are large, since we are many, many \
> > > years behind. 
> > > The `*ext.h` header files were updated fairly recently, so those diffs are not \
> > > large. 
> > > Previously we used to get the `*ext.h` headers from Khronos, but now we get all \
> > > the headers from the Mesa project. 
> > > This reduces the number of upstream sources we need to monitor.
> > > 
> > > I note that with this update, the `glxext.h` and `wglext.h` files are slightly \
> > > older in the Mesa bundle than in Khronos, but the differences are not relevant \
> > > to FX. 
> > > I did a full build and test on Mac and Linux and a sanity build (with \
> > > `-PINCLUDE_ES2=true`) on Windows. I also verified that the build artifacts are \
> > > unchanged. 
> > > As with the Java2D change, the licensing terms are the same as before, but \
> > > since we no longer get files directly from Khronos, the `opengl_fx.md` file is \
> > > gone and the `mesa3d.md` is updated as required to mention these files. 
> > > ----------------
> > > 
> > > Commits:
> > > - 7a520adc: 8232210: Update Mesa 3-D Headers to version 19.2.1
> > > 
> > > Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/26/files
> > > Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/jfx/26/webrev.00
> > > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8232210
> > > Stats: 1515 lines in 8 files changed: 1076 ins; 269 del; 170 mod
> > > Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/26.diff
> > > Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx pull/26/head:pull/26
> > 
> > Reviewers: @prrace, @arapte, @johanvos
> 
> Not sure but should not the license be GPL+CP in some of these files?

> Not sure but should not the license be GPL+CP in some of these files?

It is not necessary.

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/26


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]