On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 02:34:57PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 07/26/2011 02:31 PM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> >Hey,
> >
> >On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 03:20:31PM +0300, Alon Levy wrote:
> >>>-#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x000900 /* release 0.9.0 */
> >>>+#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x
Hi,
On 07/26/2011 02:31 PM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
Hey,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 03:20:31PM +0300, Alon Levy wrote:
-#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x000900 /* release 0.9.0 */
+#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x000901 /* release 0.9.1 */
Not directly related to this patch, but should we build
Hey,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 03:20:31PM +0300, Alon Levy wrote:
> > -#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x000900 /* release 0.9.0 */
> > +#define SPICE_SERVER_VERSION 0x000901 /* release 0.9.1 */
Not directly related to this patch, but should we build this
automatically from SPICE_MAJOR/SPICE_MINOR/SPI
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 02:18:02PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> It is a bit early to bump, since a 0.9.1 release is not happening yet,
> but this allows me to test if the vdagent SpiceCharInterface state callback
> fixes are present or not in qemu code, and thus disabling the ugly vdagent
> specif
It is a bit early to bump, since a 0.9.1 release is not happening yet,
but this allows me to test if the vdagent SpiceCharInterface state callback
fixes are present or not in qemu code, and thus disabling the ugly vdagent
specific workaround from spice-qemu-char.c when compiling against a new
enoug
