Re: [Tigervnc-devel] Broken official (legacy-friendly) build caused by enabling DPMS extension

2011-11-07 Thread Peter Åstrand
On 11/7/11 2:44 AM, Peter Åstrand wrote: Wrt DRI: I must admit that I don't fully understand how it works, but at least for Xorg server 1.5, DRI1 is not necessary for GLX, but DRI2 is, it seems. We are building with these flags: That was the clue I needed. Apparently it wasn't properly detecti

Re: [Tigervnc-devel] Broken official (legacy-friendly) build caused by enabling DPMS extension

2011-11-07 Thread DRC
On 11/7/11 2:44 AM, Peter Åstrand wrote: > Wrt DRI: I must admit that I don't fully understand how it works, but at > least for Xorg server 1.5, DRI1 is not necessary for GLX, but DRI2 is, > it seems. We are building with these flags: That was the clue I needed. Apparently it wasn't properly dete

Re: [Tigervnc-devel] Broken official (legacy-friendly) build caused by enabling DPMS extension

2011-11-07 Thread Peter Åstrand
As mentioned in the previous post, r4745 (activating the DPMS extension) broke our official project build, because of the following scenario: r4745 removes -DNO_HW_ONLY_EXTS from Xvnc_CPPFLAGS in unix/xserver/hw/vnc/Makefile.am. This causes xorg-xserver 1.6.5 to attempt to build the XFree86-DR

[Tigervnc-devel] Broken official (legacy-friendly) build caused by enabling DPMS extension

2011-11-05 Thread DRC
As mentioned in the previous post, r4745 (activating the DPMS extension) broke our official project build, because of the following scenario: r4745 removes -DNO_HW_ONLY_EXTS from Xvnc_CPPFLAGS in unix/xserver/hw/vnc/Makefile.am. This causes xorg-xserver 1.6.5 to attempt to build the XFree86-DRI e