Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Feb 3, 2010, at 12:40, Dan Nicholson wrote: On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Dan Nicholson wrote: Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady is libX11-1.2-branch. 1.3 is already out & stable. I don't think we've had a reason yet to split off a libX11-1.3-branch, since there's no changes proposed that would warrant a 1.4 bump. Oh, man, I was in an extremely stale checkout. Pushing newer proto versions doesn't seem like a nice thing to do in the middle of a stable branch. Ok, then how about we go with the 2nd patch (with the corrected/ unversioned requirements to the PKG_ macros) for the life of 1.3.x and plan on gutting that support whenever 1.4.x emerges? smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: >> Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC >> phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition >> to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from >> before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches >> for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady >> is libX11-1.2-branch. > > 1.3 is already out & stable. I don't think we've had a reason yet to > split off a libX11-1.3-branch, since there's no changes proposed that > would warrant a 1.4 bump. Oh, man, I was in an extremely stale checkout. Pushing newer proto versions doesn't seem like a nice thing to do in the middle of a stable branch. -- Dan ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
Dan Nicholson wrote: > Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC > phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition > to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from > before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches > for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady > is libX11-1.2-branch. 1.3 is already out & stable. I don't think we've had a reason yet to split off a libX11-1.3-branch, since there's no changes proposed that would warrant a 1.4 bump. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:21:13 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote: > I like the original patch for master, but maybe Julien has a different > perspective. > No that's fine. As far as I'm concerned you can go ahead with the original patch. Thanks! Cheers, Julien ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: >> Of course, since you've enforced newer xcmiscproto and friends in the >> pkg-config checks, you'll always have these headers. > > bah. yes. I'll back those out. > >> Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC >> phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition >> to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from >> before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches >> for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady >> is libX11-1.2-branch. > > Yeah, I considered that as well, and I'd be fine either way. I'd prefer the > original patch (forcing new protos), but I do believe the 1.2 branch is > "good enough" for anyone stuck on old protos. I like the original patch for master, but maybe Julien has a different perspective. -- Dan ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
Of course, since you've enforced newer xcmiscproto and friends in the pkg-config checks, you'll always have these headers. bah. yes. I'll back those out. Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady is libX11-1.2-branch. Yeah, I considered that as well, and I'd be fine either way. I'd prefer the original patch (forcing new protos), but I do believe the 1.2 branch is "good enough" for anyone stuck on old protos. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jeremy Huddleston
wrote:
>
> On Feb 3, 2010, at 09:31, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 09:17:35 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
>>>
>>> 2) We're reporting that they're deprecated, so if we expect 3rd party
>>> clients of the headers to migrate, we should be willing to do it for
>>> our own code.
>>
>> We can migrate while still staying compatible with the old stuff with a
>> couple configure checks.
>
> How about this then:
>
>
> From 5c271b18b45b8e138b793e0a882fd894a488610b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jeremy Huddleston
> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:48:42 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and
> xf86bigfontproto
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston
> Acked-by: Dan Nicholson
> ---
> configure.ac | 10 +++---
> src/Font.c | 4
> src/OpenDis.c | 4
> src/XlibInt.c | 4
> 4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 0eea575..93d9959 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -60,13 +60,13 @@ AM_CONDITIONAL(XCB, test x$ac_cv_use_xcb != xno)
> # Checks for pkg-config packages
>
> # Always required
> -X11_REQUIRES='xproto >= 7.0.13 xextproto xtrans'
> +X11_REQUIRES='[xproto >= 7.0.13] xextproto xtrans'
>
> PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG()
>
> case "$ac_cv_use_xcb" in
> no)
> - X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau xcmiscproto bigreqsproto"
> + X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau [xcmiscproto >= 1.2.0]
> [bigreqsproto >= 1.1.0]"
> X11_EXTRA_DEPS="xau"
> PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XDMCP, xdmcp,
> AC_CHECK_LIB(Xdmcp, XdmcpWrap,
> @@ -186,6 +186,10 @@ AC_MSG_RESULT($XLIB_LOADABLE_XCURSOR)
> AC_HEADER_STDC
> AC_CHECK_HEADERS([sys/select.h])
>
> +# Backwards compatability with older proto packages. This will be removed
> eventually.
> +# When removing, make sure to update Font.c OpenDis.c XlibInt.c
> +AC_CHECK_HEADERS([X11/extensions/xcmiscproto.h
> X11/extensions/bigreqsproto.h X11/extensions/xf86bigfproto.h], [], [],
> [#include ])
Of course, since you've enforced newer xcmiscproto and friends in the
pkg-config checks, you'll always have these headers.
Another thing to think about is that libX11 is currently in 1.3 RC
phase, so it's reasonable to enforce newer proto versions in addition
to the version of xproto needed for generic events. We can branch from
before the generic events patches (75fe48e7a) and cherry pick patches
for a 1.2.x for people on more stable systems. In fact, there aleady
is libX11-1.2-branch.
--
Dan
___
xorg-devel mailing list
xorg-devel@lists.x.org
http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Feb 3, 2010, at 09:31, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 09:17:35 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
2) We're reporting that they're deprecated, so if we expect 3rd party
clients of the headers to migrate, we should be willing to do it for
our own code.
We can migrate while still staying compatible with the old stuff
with a
couple configure checks.
How about this then:
From 5c271b18b45b8e138b793e0a882fd894a488610b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jeremy Huddleston
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 15:48:42 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto,
and xf86bigfontproto
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston
Acked-by: Dan Nicholson
---
configure.ac | 10 +++---
src/Font.c|4
src/OpenDis.c |4
src/XlibInt.c |4
4 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
index 0eea575..93d9959 100644
--- a/configure.ac
+++ b/configure.ac
@@ -60,13 +60,13 @@ AM_CONDITIONAL(XCB, test x$ac_cv_use_xcb != xno)
# Checks for pkg-config packages
# Always required
-X11_REQUIRES='xproto >= 7.0.13 xextproto xtrans'
+X11_REQUIRES='[xproto >= 7.0.13] xextproto xtrans'
PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG()
case "$ac_cv_use_xcb" in
no)
- X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau xcmiscproto bigreqsproto"
+ X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau [xcmiscproto >= 1.2.0]
[bigreqsproto >= 1.1.0]"
X11_EXTRA_DEPS="xau"
PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XDMCP, xdmcp,
AC_CHECK_LIB(Xdmcp, XdmcpWrap,
@@ -186,6 +186,10 @@ AC_MSG_RESULT($XLIB_LOADABLE_XCURSOR)
AC_HEADER_STDC
AC_CHECK_HEADERS([sys/select.h])
+# Backwards compatability with older proto packages. This will be
removed eventually.
+# When removing, make sure to update Font.c OpenDis.c XlibInt.c
+AC_CHECK_HEADERS([X11/extensions/xcmiscproto.h X11/extensions/
bigreqsproto.h X11/extensions/xf86bigfproto.h], [], [], [#include Xproto.h>])
+
# Checks for typedefs, structures, and compiler characteristics.
# Checks for library functions.
@@ -330,7 +334,7 @@ AC_ARG_ENABLE(xf86bigfont,
[Disable XF86BigFont extension support]),
[XF86BIGFONT=$enableval],[XF86BIGFONT="yes"])
if test "x$XF86BIGFONT" = "xyes"; then
-PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, xf86bigfontproto,
+PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, [xf86bigfontproto >= 1.2.0],
AC_DEFINE(XF86BIGFONT,1,[Enable XF86BIGFONT
extension]),XF86BIGFONT="no")
AC_SUBST(BIGFONT_CFLAGS)
AC_SUBST(BIGFONT_LIBS)
diff --git a/src/Font.c b/src/Font.c
index b664b8d..2b82ade 100644
--- a/src/Font.c
+++ b/src/Font.c
@@ -45,8 +45,12 @@ authorization from the X Consortium and the XFree86
Project.
#include
#include
+#ifdef HAVE_X11_EXTENSIONS_XF86BIGFPROTO_H
+#include
+#else
#include
#endif
+#endif
#include "Xlcint.h"
#include "XlcPubI.h"
diff --git a/src/OpenDis.c b/src/OpenDis.c
index 46e1026..e4656a2 100644
--- a/src/OpenDis.c
+++ b/src/OpenDis.c
@@ -34,7 +34,11 @@ in this Software without prior written
authorization from The Open Group.
#include "Xxcbint.h"
#else /* !USE_XCB */
#include
+#ifdef HAVE_X11_EXTENSIONS_BIGREQSPROTO_H
+#include
+#else
#include
+#endif
#endif /* USE_XCB */
#include
#include
diff --git a/src/XlibInt.c b/src/XlibInt.c
index fb6e715..8e06273 100644
--- a/src/XlibInt.c
+++ b/src/XlibInt.c
@@ -44,7 +44,11 @@ from The Open Group.
#include
#if !USE_XCB
#include
+#ifdef HAVE_X11_EXTENSIONS_XCMISCPROTO_H
+#include
+#else
#include
+#endif
#endif /* !USE_XCB */
#include
#include
--
1.6.3.1
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
xorg-devel mailing list
xorg-devel@lists.x.org
http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 09:17:35 -0800, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: > I think it makes sense because: > > 1) If people are updating their libX11, they can easily update their protos. I'm not completely sure about this one. Updating the protos requires updating the server to 1.7.x, which may not necessarily be as easy. It's probably possible to add some ifdefs to the new proto/lib headers to keep old xserver buildable, but it hasn't been done afaik. > 2) We're reporting that they're deprecated, so if we expect 3rd party > clients of the headers to migrate, we should be willing to do it for > our own code. We can migrate while still staying compatible with the old stuff with a couple configure checks. > 3) The server has already done it. > 4) Fewer warnings make me happier, and I like being happy. ack. Cheers, Julien ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
I think it makes sense because: 1) If people are updating their libX11, they can easily update their protos. 2) We're reporting that they're deprecated, so if we expect 3rd party clients of the headers to migrate, we should be willing to do it for our own code. 3) The server has already done it. 4) Fewer warnings make me happier, and I like being happy. On Feb 3, 2010, at 09:14, Julien Cristau wrote: > > Would it make sense to keep compatibility with the old header locations > instead of requiring the newer protos? > > I don't have a particular opinion either way, just thought I'd ask. > > Cheers, > Julien ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
Would it make sense to keep compatibility with the old header locations instead of requiring the newer protos? I don't have a particular opinion either way, just thought I'd ask. Cheers, Julien ___ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
wrote:
>
> On Feb 2, 2010, at 19:49, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
>>> - X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau xcmiscproto bigreqsproto"
>>> + X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau [xcmiscproto >= 1.2.0]
>>> [bigreqsproto >= 1.1.0]"
>>
>> Do these actually change anything? autoconf is just going to remove
>> the [] after processing through m4, and having >= within quotes in
>> shell is fine. There's a lot of this excessive quoting/unquoting in
>> the x configure.ac's, and all that's really needed is to make sure
>> that the arguments to the autoconf m4 macros are quoted...
>
> I did it more for stylistic reasons.
Fair enough. I doesn't hurt anything.
>>> - PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, xf86bigfontproto,
>>> + PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, [xf86bigfontproto >= 1.2.0],
>>
>> like this. Can you show the warning that was being printed?
>
> I'm not sure what you mean... I thought it was fairly obvious from the commit
> message.
>
> $ echo "#include " | gcc -E - -o /dev/null
> In file included from :1:
> ./xf86bigfstr.h:1:2: warning: #warning "xf86bigfstr.h is obsolete and may be
> removed in the future."
> ./xf86bigfstr.h:2:2: warning: #warning "include
> for the protocol defines."
Sorry, I thought you meant there were warnings from autoconf, too.
This obviously makes more sense.
Acked-by: Dan Nicholson
___
xorg-devel mailing list
xorg-devel@lists.x.org
http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Feb 2, 2010, at 19:49, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>> - X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau xcmiscproto bigreqsproto"
>> + X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau [xcmiscproto >= 1.2.0]
>> [bigreqsproto >= 1.1.0]"
>
> Do these actually change anything? autoconf is just going to remove
> the [] after processing through m4, and having >= within quotes in
> shell is fine. There's a lot of this excessive quoting/unquoting in
> the x configure.ac's, and all that's really needed is to make sure
> that the arguments to the autoconf m4 macros are quoted...
I did it more for stylistic reasons.
>> -PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, xf86bigfontproto,
>> +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, [xf86bigfontproto >= 1.2.0],
>
> like this. Can you show the warning that was being printed?
I'm not sure what you mean... I thought it was fairly obvious from the commit
message.
$ echo "#include " | gcc -E - -o /dev/null
In file included from :1:
./xf86bigfstr.h:1:2: warning: #warning "xf86bigfstr.h is obsolete and may be
removed in the future."
./xf86bigfstr.h:2:2: warning: #warning "include
for the protocol defines."
___
xorg-devel mailing list
xorg-devel@lists.x.org
http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [PATCH libX11 1/2] Fix warnings for recent bigreqsproto, xcmiscproto, and xf86bigfontproto
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston
> ---
> configure.ac | 6 +++---
> src/Font.c | 2 +-
> src/OpenDis.c | 2 +-
> src/XlibInt.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 0eea575..00ab51c 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -60,13 +60,13 @@ AM_CONDITIONAL(XCB, test x$ac_cv_use_xcb != xno)
> # Checks for pkg-config packages
>
> # Always required
> -X11_REQUIRES='xproto >= 7.0.13 xextproto xtrans'
> +X11_REQUIRES='[xproto >= 7.0.13] xextproto xtrans'
>
> PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG()
>
> case "$ac_cv_use_xcb" in
> no)
> - X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau xcmiscproto bigreqsproto"
> + X11_REQUIRES="${X11_REQUIRES} xau [xcmiscproto >= 1.2.0]
> [bigreqsproto >= 1.1.0]"
Do these actually change anything? autoconf is just going to remove
the [] after processing through m4, and having >= within quotes in
shell is fine. There's a lot of this excessive quoting/unquoting in
the x configure.ac's, and all that's really needed is to make sure
that the arguments to the autoconf m4 macros are quoted...
> X11_EXTRA_DEPS="xau"
> PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XDMCP, xdmcp,
> AC_CHECK_LIB(Xdmcp, XdmcpWrap,
> @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ AC_ARG_ENABLE(xf86bigfont,
> [Disable XF86BigFont extension support]),
> [XF86BIGFONT=$enableval],[XF86BIGFONT="yes"])
> if test "x$XF86BIGFONT" = "xyes"; then
> - PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, xf86bigfontproto,
> + PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BIGFONT, [xf86bigfontproto >= 1.2.0],
like this. Can you show the warning that was being printed?
--
Dan
___
xorg-devel mailing list
xorg-devel@lists.x.org
http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
