I would rather define a USE_PDFVIEW constant as suggested by sj.
Andreas
Am 02.12.25 um 17:44 schrieb Richard Shann:
On Mon, 2025-12-01 at 22:36 +0100, Andreas Schneider wrote:
Wouldn't it be more straight forward to test for USE_EVINCE or
USE_ATRIL in the sources?
well there are 39 places where USE_EVINCE occurs in the sources, but
perhaps if I put
#ifdef USE_ATRIL
#define USE_EVINCE 1
#endif
into denemo.h this would meet the need. Anyone see any snag with that?
Am 01.12.25 um 23:04 schrieb sj:
> I think it would be even better to just replace current USE_EVINCE usage
> with something like USE_PDFVIEW (keeping the original defines for fixing
> differences), but that seems like a pretty troublesome adventure to
> start now that the current usage is so ingrained in the codebase.
>
> I think putting in 'or defined USE_ATRIL' into every USE_EVINCE check is
> about the same burden in terms of workload (and if you mess up, the bugs
> may or may not become apparent at first for whatever weird gcc reason,
> though I'm quite unsure about that – is there any actual behavioral
> difference between the two libs that required #ifdef-ing behavior
> instead of just conditionally defining functions as NOP if no PDF viewer
> was found?).
