On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Derek Foreman <der...@osg.samsung.com> wrote:
> On 16/02/16 10:37 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 16 February 2016 at 16:34, Derek Foreman <der...@osg.samsung.com> > wrote: > >> +try_damage_buffer(struct dri2_egl_surface *dri2_surf, > >> + const EGLint *rects, > >> + EGLint n_rects) > >> +{ > >> +/* The WL_SURFACE_DAMAGE_BUFFER_SINCE_VERSION macro and > >> + * wl_proxy_get_version() were both introduced in wayland 1.10. > >> + * Instead of bumping our wayland dependency we just make this > >> + * function conditional on the required 1.10 features, falling > >> + * back to old (correct but suboptimal) behaviour for older > >> + * wayland. > >> + */ > >> +#ifdef WL_SURFACE_DAMAGE_BUFFER_SINCE_VERSION > > > > It still bumps the runtime requirement, i.e. once built against >=1.10 > > it can only ever be run against >= 1.10. Maybe dlsym is overkill, but > > OTOH maybe not ... > > Yup, that's true. > > I kind of just assumed distros would set their own dependency > information to whatever libwayland they actually built against. > > I hadn't given much thought to building mesa against a new libwayland > then downgrading libwayland or transplanting that mesa to a system with > older wayland. > > I can re-do this with runtime dlsym checking for wl_proxy_get_version() > if that's preferred - someone else can make that decision because I > don't have a strong opinion either way. :) > I just added ajax to the CC. He's the person who will have to deal with the back-porting fall-out so I'll let him venture an opinion. Personally, I don't really care either way. --Jason
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev