Re: [Plib-devel] OpenGL headers (was: Updated configure script in CVS)

[Sebastian U. <ud...@ha...>]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, sjb...@ai... (Steve Baker) wrote:
> Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:33:13 -0500
> To: pli...@li...
> From: sjb...@ai... (Steve Baker)
> Reply-To: pli...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Plib-devel] OpenGL headers (was: Updated configure script
> in CVS)

[...]

> > The question is if it is said anywhere that glu.h *must* include gl.h.
>
> I don't think I've seen that said anywhere - but a more significant
> question is "Why are we including glu.h at all?"  I doubt we are using
> GLU functions anywhere in the core package - and it's just one more
> annoying dependancy we could avoid.

Good point, Steve. I checked it - the PLIB libraries are in deed entirely
GLU-free. Hooray !

If we can keep the PLIB libraries GLU-free in the long run - which should
not be a big problem as far as I can tell, but of course, you are the
expert concerning these things - I don't see any reason why we should NOT
get rid of the GLU dependancy.

Thus, I am going to remove all occurances of "#include <GL/glu.h>" from the
source and I will modify the build system of the main library (!) so that
it no longer checks for libGLU.


> So I think we just need:
>
> #include <GL/gl.h>

I agree.


> ....however, some of the example programs *do* use glu.h functions - so
> the problem has to be resolved there.  However, it *is* defined that
glut.h
> includes both gl.h and glu.h - [...]

Excactly.


> [...] so since (IIRC) we include glut.h in all of the examples and demos,
we
> should be OK there too.

Yes.


- Sebastian