Looks good Volker. I agree, NO_XRANDR is reasonable and better than HAVE_XRANDR.
I have to say, the amount of work this took is insane for the size of the problem involved. Cheers, Thomas On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 2:54 PM Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > can I please have a review for the following trivial change which > handles the absence of Xrandr more generically: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2018/8214343/ > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214343 > > Change JDK-8213944 fixed the build on AIX (which has no Xrandr) by > conditionally excluding the relevant parts on AIX with the help of > preprocessor defines. On the mailing lists the wish was expressed to > handle the absence of Xrandr more generically during the configure > step, so here comes the corresponding change. > > In contrast to the suggestions on the previous mail thread I define > "NO_XRENDER" if we're configuring on AIX. This avoids clobbering all > the other platforms which support Xrandr with yet another command line > define of the form "-DHAVE_XRANDR". Instead, only the corresponding > compiler options on AIX will now contain "-DNO_XRANDR". Other > platforms which don't support Xrandr can now easily define NO_XRANDR > as well. > > Thank you and best regards, > Volker
