[PATCH util/modular] jhbuildrc: Restore mesa-demos, mesa-glut, mesa-glu

[Gaetan Nadon]

On 14-03-18 12:56 PM, Jon TURNEY wrote:
> On 16/03/2014 18:15, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
>> On 14-03-15 02:17 PM, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>> On 14/03/2014 20:03, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>>> As of 9167c5e7177a758fce55afe759fa48c47a4f7f4e we had mesa-demos, mesa-glut and
>>>> mesa-glu modules.
>>>>
>>>> 9167c5e7177a758fce55afe759fa48c47a4f7f4e "add missing modules and meta modules"
>>>> (confusingly) removes them.
>>>>
>>>> Restore mesa-demos, mesa-glut, mesa-glu so they get tinderboxed.
>>> Sorry, that was completely the wrong patch.  Try the attached, instead.
>>>
>> The reason I had not included these is that they are not needed to build
>> a runnable X Window System, to my knowledge (I could be wrong on that).
> Okay.  But xorg.modules contains lots of stuff which isn't required for that
> (e.g. app-xman), and if it's going to drive tinderbox, it should, I think,
> build as much stuff as we can stand, so that commits which break something
> have more chance to be noticed as soon as possible.
I know, there is no logic to describe what should or should not be in
tinderbox. It's more or less based on consensus.

If you do need those, go ahead, no objections. So as long it is not just
"because they were there before". It would be nice to describe in the
commit text the reason why we add/remove modules from jhbuild or build.sh.

Thanks!

>
>> I noticed the patch was reverted.
> With my usual bumbling incompetence, I typed 'git push' into the wrong
> terminal and pushed the unreviewed, broken version of this patch, so I also
> pushed a revert.
>
>> As for fontconfig, I always hesitated. It has been  available on all
>> platforms for the longest time, I never understood why it was included.
>> And we don't need the latest unreleased version.
> This is a separate issue, but again, unless it is tinderboxed elsewhere, I
> wouldn't want to see it removed.
>
>