On Nov 25, 2015 12:03 PM, "Derek Foreman" <<a href="mailto:derekf@osg.samsung.com">derekf@osg.samsung.com</a>> wrote: > > On 13/11/15 12:21 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Giulio Camuffo <<a href="mailto:giuliocamuffo@gmail.com">giuliocamuffo@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > >> So do i understand correctly that if the app creating the > >> wl_compositor was built against a libwayland without this patch the > >> version returned in mesa by wl_proxy_get_version() for every proxy > >> will be always 1? > > > > Yes, see also the second e-mail link below. I proposed to make > > wl_display version 0 so that libraries can detect whether the client > > was built against old or new libwayland. > > > > --Jason > > We can do a test like... > if (proxy == (struct wl_proxy *)proxy->display) > return 1; > > in wl_proxy_get_version() if we want to return non-0 values from > wl_display_get_version(display); > > Is this worth the trouble, or is it safe to always consider wl_display > to be "unversioned"? I don't think it matters. The wl_display object will only ever report one version. Whether that version is 1 or 0 probably doesn't matter. I'd personally go with 0 but I think you already knew that. ;-) --Jason