Update Makefile comment to indicate arm64 as a supported Linux desktop platform #2965
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I have been able to build and run raylib applications on a Pinebook Pro, which uses a set of ARM64 processors. Currently, the Makefile and wiki indicate that the x86 and x86-64 platforms are the only supported platforms, but ARM64 does seem to be working.
Pong made with raylib running on a Pinebook Pro:
The one caveat is that I needed to set
LIBGL_ALWAYS_SOFTWARE=trueto force software rendering, as otherwise the application was unable to initialize the OpenGL context, producing aGLXBadFBConfigerror:However, I suspect this is a hardware issue with the Pinebook Pro, which is closer to a system-on-a-chip than a traditional desktop platform. I tested building raylib with OpenGL 1.1 support and still received the same error, which indicates to me that something else is the root cause, and that a more traditional ARM64 machine would suffer from this issue, especially given that Arch Linux ARM aarch64 already contains a package for raylib version 4.2.0.