On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:08:58 -0700, Ivan Gyurdiev <ivg2(a)cornell.edu> wrote:
Does 'extensions' not imply that they're optional?
If you don't use extensions would it break?
you would think that... but as soon as you build applications against
the nvidia headers.. you see such a rational thought contradicts
reality. Building the apps exactly the same way with exactly the
same compile time options...gives you exactly what you don't want..
binaries tied to nvidia's libs.
How do you make use of the Nvidia extensions with the Mesa headers?
if you really really really want to tie your binary to the existence
of nvidia hardware and libs.. you use nvidia's headers and libs at
compile time. And with livna's rpms you can do exactly that by setting
appropriate -L and -I to point to the nvidia libs and headers when you
are building/linking at compile time. This however is seldom
something a community contributor wants to do.
I think at this point... your questions are best answered by
rebuilding sourcecode into binaries for yourself and watching the
truth unfold. Or digging into archives and into old bugtickets that
have gone over exact this same ground with community packagers.