| Summary: | Ship xproto.pc in $(datadir)/pkgconfig | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | xorg | Reporter: | Cyril Brulebois <kibi> | ||||
| Component: | Build/Modular | Assignee: | Xorg Project Team <xorg-team> | ||||
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | Xorg Project Team <xorg-team> | ||||
| Severity: | enhancement | ||||||
| Priority: | low | CC: | jeremyhu, kibi, Marc-Antoine, sardemff7+freedesktop | ||||
| Version: | git | ||||||
| Hardware: | Other | ||||||
| OS: | All | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | 2011BRB_Reviewed | ||||||
| i915 platform: | i915 features: | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Cyril Brulebois
2010-04-03 16:06:54 UTC
Created attachment 34652 [details] [review] Proposed patch against git master Assigning to Keith, who is in the middle of a complete overhaul of the proto packages anyway. Keith, ACK/NACK? (The same would go for other proto packages.) I don't really care either way, just wondering whether that's going to be merged at some point or closed WONTFIX (so that I can update the Debian bug accordingly). Daniel has promised to merge the protocol packages together "real soon now". I don't have any opinion in this matter as I don't know why it matters. Since the proto merge has been delayed, why not just submit this patch to xorg-devel so it gets reviewed & applied? bugzilla is where patches go to hide out for years unapplied and unloved. Since this is effectively what I already do in building the Solaris X packages, I'd agree to it, but only if we do it consistently for all the *proto.pc. yeah, this patch is correct, IMO and should be applied to all the protos. Gaetan has good batch-fu, so maybe he can tackle this... ? =) Just a note of caution: Of all the protos, xproto is actually the exception and the one that's not completely platform independent, due to the configure checks that substitute platform values into Xpoll.h.in and Xfuncproto.h.in. For cross-compiling for other ISA's on the same kernel there shouldn't be any issue, but if anyone tries cross-compiling for another OS, they'd want to look closely at it. (Though for almost all modern OS'es, the generated answers are the same - darwin and cygwin are surprisingly missing though.) Any news on this issue? I can provide patches for all the relevant repositories if needed. Since nearly all x*protos are affected and it's kinda trivial and straightforward, would patches be accepted and pushed , as the one submitted... in 2010 ? (In reply to comment #9) > Since nearly all x*protos are affected and it's kinda trivial and > straightforward, would patches be accepted and pushed , as the one > submitted... in 2010 ? Hard to say, given the ongoing debate on whether this hurts cross-compiling or not, as discussed on xorg-devel recently - see the thread "Installing proto pc files in /usr/share/pkgconfig?" on http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-September/thread.html If you'd like to see this happen, contributing to that discussion may help. xorgproto does this now. |
Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.