[lsb-discuss] Navigator reporting GL missing on Ubuntu 10.x

Craig Scott craig.scott at csiro.au
Thu Jan 20 20:02:14 PST 2011

Fair enough. Pragmatically speaking though, the LSB requires support for *an* opengl implementation, so it doesn't make sense for the LSB app checker to fail due to no opengl implementation being selected. Hence my suggestion that mesa be made the "default choice" as far as LSB compliance checking is concerned. While this choice may seem rather arbitrary, I don't think too many people would argue against mesa being more or less a defacto standard among linux distributions as "what you get if you don't actively choose something else" for your opengl. ;)

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 2:56:22 pm Daniel Harrison wrote:
> On 01/20/2011 08:26 PM, Craig Scott wrote:
> > It would seem to me that the mesa library should be considered "installed by default" as a baseline, just like it is for all other distributions and versions. If this is not the case, then any GL app will technically fail according to the app checker due to a missing GL library which isn't really missing at all.
> The problem is that you have to pick an OpenGL implementation, and Ubuntu is trying to keep from forcing that on its users. Why it's not auto-detected at install time -- what I would imagine they would do -- is a question for their developers.

Dr Craig Scott
Computational Software Engineering Team Leader, CSIRO (CMIS)
Melbourne, Australia

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list