Chromium for AMD64

[dmpogo]

@linear

Could you check the dates on your .h files relative to the rest from nvidia-drivers ? Could it be that they are leftovers from some previous installation ?
I looked at nvidia-drivers ebuild and the only reference to glx headers I see is

Code: Select all

        # Use some more sensible gl headers and make way for new glext.h
        epatch "${FILESDIR}"/NVIDIA_glx-glheader.patch

BTW, your 185.18.36 is not in portage anymore, 185.18.36-r1 is. Could it be that the difference is this header patch ?

[linear]

Could you check the dates on your .h files relative to the rest from nvidia-drivers ? Could it be that they are leftovers from some previous installation ?
I looked at nvidia-drivers ebuild and the only reference to glx headers I see is

Code: Select all

        # Use some more sensible gl headers and make way for new glext.h
        epatch "${FILESDIR}"/NVIDIA_glx-glheader.patch

BTW, your 185.18.36 is not in portage anymore, 185.18.36-r1 is. Could it be that the difference is this header patch ?

Hmmmm... very possibly. Since, when I look in the ebuild for the drivers I have in, I find a couple of places where it discusses header files:

Code: Select all

 # Use some more sensible gl headers and make way for new glext.h
 	epatch "${FILESDIR}"/NVIDIA_glx-glheader.patch 

That one is the same as you found, but I also have these:

Code: Select all

                # don't ask me why the headers are there.. glxext.h is missing 
                incdir=doc

and

Code: Select all

        # Includes
       	insinto ${NV_ROOT}/include
        doins ${incdir}/*.h 

and then goes into the cuda.h and vdpau.h files that you were discussing earlier. As a note, the -r1 version's ebuild has the same entries as well. And, I still have not had a chance to log off my desktop as I have a couple of large projects I'm working on at this time. But, I will do so at my first available opportunity.
BTW, here is the dates for you on those header files compared to the other files:

Code: Select all

 # ls -l /usr/lib64/opengl/nvidia/include/total 588
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  73062 Dec 11  2009 gl.h
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 465838 Dec 11  2009 glext.h
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  14049 Dec 11  2009 glx.h
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  34430 Dec 11  2009 glxext.h

The rest of the fies:

Code: Select all

 # ls -l /usr/lib64/opengl/nvidia/       
total 20
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Dec 11  2009 extensions
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Dec 11  2009 include
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Dec 11  2009 lib
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Dec 11  2009 no-tls
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Dec 11  2009 tls

and

Code: Select all

 # ls -l /usr/lib64/opengl/nvidia/lib/
total 19472
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root      715 Dec 11  2009 libGL.la
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       18 Dec 11  2009 libGL.so -> libGL.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       18 Dec 11  2009 libGL.so.1 -> libGL.so.185.18.36
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   792992 Dec 11  2009 libGL.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       22 Dec 11  2009 libGLcore.so -> libGLcore.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       22 Dec 11  2009 libGLcore.so.1 -> libGLcore.so.185.18.36
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 18972488 Dec 11  2009 libGLcore.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       26 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-cfg.so -> libnvidia-cfg.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       26 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-cfg.so.1 -> libnvidia-cfg.so.185.18.36
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   133896 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-cfg.so.185.18.36
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       23 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-tls.so -> ../tls/libnvidia-tls.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       25 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-tls.so.1 -> ../tls/libnvidia-tls.so.1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root       33 Dec 11  2009 libnvidia-tls.so.185.18.36 -> ../tls/libnvidia-tls.so.185.18.36

So, they definitely came with the package and were copied in by portage. Now, the package I am planning to upgrade to (nvidia-drivers-195.36.15) has it the way you are describing, so we'll see what happens when I get to that point.

TTYL.

[NiLuJe]

Yep, nVidia's OpenGL headers aren't installed anymore since the 190.42-r2 ebuild. I don't know why that is though...

I updated the nvidia-drivers beta/rc ebuilds @bugzilla (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=321061#c50) to include back the ability to install them (but commented out by default for now), if anybody cares to try...

[phajdan.jr]

Yep, nVidia's OpenGL headers aren't installed anymore since the 190.42-r2 ebuild. I don't know why that is though...

But then 195.x.x seems to install the headers again: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=324893. This is a bit strange. Maybe some of you who use nvidia-drivers, just still use xorg-x11 OpenGL implementation? That may explain the differences.

[dmpogo]

Yep, nVidia's OpenGL headers aren't installed anymore since the 190.42-r2 ebuild. I don't know why that is though...

But then 195.x.x seems to install the headers again: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=324893. This is a bit strange. Maybe some of you who use nvidia-drivers, just still use xorg-x11 OpenGL implementation? That may explain the differences.

No, I don't for one. And no headers with neither nvidia-drivers-190.42-r3 nor nvidia-drivers-173.14.25

[NiLuJe]

Yep, nVidia's OpenGL headers aren't installed anymore since the 190.42-r2 ebuild. I don't know why that is though...

But then 195.x.x seems to install the headers again: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=324893. This is a bit strange. Maybe some of you who use nvidia-drivers, just still use xorg-x11 OpenGL implementation? That may explain the differences.

That may be because the 195.x drivers were rc/beta drivers released before the stable 190.42. I didn't check, but that's one possible reason .

EDIT: Err, actually, 195.36.31 is a 'stable' release, and we don't have an ebuild for it in the tree, so it's likely from a local overlay bumped from a recent ebuild which didn't install the headers. (It's been ~6 months since 190.42-r2).

And, yeah, what this means is that eselect-opengl setups it's 'global' OpenGL headers, which are likely slightly older snapshot of the xorg-x11 implementation. And so chrome builds successfully on those systems, and not on the ones using older nvidia-drivers ebuild, because eselect-opengl would then use nVidia's OpenGL implementation, which chrome doesn't seem to support.

[linear]

Okay,

I got it running on nvidia-drivers-195.36.24. Yeah!

@dmpogo: And on these drivers, it got rid of glx.h, vdpau.h but it still has the epatch line as well as the cuda.h and a new one, OpenCL headers under /usr/include/CL. Go figure.

@phajdan.jr: Thanks again. Both for here and at code.google.com. You rock!

Thanks for the assist, folks. Now having a blast exploring Chromium! W00T!