[Buildroot] [PATCH 03/14] package/x11-video-drivers: do not select, but depends on mesa3d

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Yann E. MORIN,

On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:04:15 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote:

> Currently, X.Org drivers that need mesa3d forcibly select it.

[...]

>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-ati/Config.in        | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-glint/Config.in      | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-intel/Config.in      | 8 ++++++--
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-mach64/Config.in     | 3 +++
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-mga/Config.in        | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-openchrome/Config.in | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-r128/Config.in       | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-savage/Config.in     | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-sis/Config.in        | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-tdfx/Config.in       | 5 ++++-
>  package/x11r7/xdriver_xf86-video-vmware/Config.in     | 5 ++++-
>  11 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

I know the dependency on mesa3d is not something added by your patch,
but I'm wondering: do all these drivers actually *require* mesa3d ?
Isn't it possible to build for example, the Intel X.org driver, for
just 2D acceleration purposes? Or does even 2D acceleration relies on
an OpenGL implementation being available, these days?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com