libepoxy without xorg deps possible?

[David Evans]

On 2/15/15 4:54 AM, Marko Käning wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 15 Jan 2015, at 09:54 , David Evans <devans at macports.org> wrote:
>> As it stands, it is designed to work with X11.  As such, it depends on mesa and
>> xorg-libX11.  The rest of the dependencies are from mesa.
>>
>> See https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy/blob/master/README.md
>>
>> It's required by gtk3 in the current unstable branch 3.15.
>
> since I need libepoxy for kdecoration (a KF5 framework) I had another look into your
> port.
>
> It is clear, that libepoxy 1.2.0 still needs X11, but its latest commit [1] doesn’t
> anymore. This is very interesting for me, as it reduces the number of ports to
> install on the OSX/KDE/CI system, which I am running here [2,3].
>
> So, I just tweaked your Portfile a little and ended up with a port called
> libepoxy-devel [4]. This now doesn’t require mesa and X11 anymore, after all. :-D
>
> The question is, whether we should introduce this port on MacPorts or rather wait
> for the next official release on GitHub?
>
> In [4] I have chosen as version number “1.2.0+” plus an abused revision being a date,
> since git commit 20062c25 is based on that release. I am aware of that this is NOT
> the way to go since I had a discussion about version numbering regarding Cockatrice
> in December and I don’t want [5]. I like to avoid epoch for any port and also want a
> consistent versioning scheme - which still would have to be implemented, I know. :)
>
> Since you actually still need the X11-based 1.2.0 for gtk3, I think it would be best
> to have both possibilities, either as separate ports or subports. I guess using a
> variant (i.e. -x11) could be another option, but I am not sure whether this is the
> best way or not. The implications of using variants on MacPorts upgrades always are
> mystery to me… ;-)
>
> OK, herewith I just want to get a feel for which way we should go.
>
> Greets,
> Marko
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/anholt/libepoxy/commit/20062c25e7612cab023cdef44d3277ba1bd0b2de
> [2] http://commits.kde.org/clones/websites/build-kde-org/kaning/mp-osx-ci/5ecd1848588fa5dc54df6a14c3530bcf503a3905
> [3] https://trac.macports.org/wiki/KDEProblems/KDEMacPortsCI/Status
> [4] https://projects.kde.org/projects/playground/sdk/macports-kde/repository/revisions/8e34c9e5a9190ef1fc33ad1305cffe39c62b19d9/entry/dports/graphics/libepoxy-devel/Portfile
> [5] https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2014-December/029038.html
Marko --

I'll take another look at all of this.  Currently gtk3 and libepoxy are 
in flux in the unstable branch 3.15 so I think
it's best to see how this works out before jumping to conclusions. This 
should be resolved with the 3.16 stable
release scheduled for mid-March.

I will also look at building a +quartz variant of libepoxy and what that 
implies.  But again probably should wait
on this until a new version is released (hopefully around the same time 
as gtk 3.16.

gtk3 now supports building multiple backends at once (not just +x11 or 
+quartz but both) and this includes the GLX
backend that libepoxy supports as well as wayland, broadway and mir.  Of 
course this requires ports that depend on gtk3 to be aware of this and 
encorporate code to check what backends are available for them to use.  
So we need to see if this will work with existing ports or whether 
additional modifications are necessary.

I'll try and post updates as the situation develops.

Thanks for the new information and sorry for not responding sooner. I 
just got back from a week's vacation last week and have been trying get 
over the flu ever since.  So I'm running on half power and trying to 
catch up on back issues both at work and with MacPorts.

Dave