On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
jerem...@freedesktop.org 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
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
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.
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
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Jeremy Huddleston
jerem...@freedesktop.org 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
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
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
jerem...@freedesktop.org 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
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
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
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@sun.com 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
On Feb 3, 2010, at 12:40, Dan Nicholson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Alan Coopersmith
alan.coopersm...@sun.com 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
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@apple.com
---
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
---
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jeremy Huddleston
jerem...@freedesktop.org wrote:
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Huddleston jerem...@apple.com
---
configure.ac | 6 +++---
src/Font.c | 2 +-
src/OpenDis.c | 2 +-
src/XlibInt.c | 2 +-
4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6
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
14 matches
Mail list logo
