[PATCH v2 libdrm 1/7] configure: Support symbol visibility when available

[Thierry Reding]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:15:14PM +0200, Erik Faye-Lund wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding at gmail.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/libdrm.h b/libdrm.h
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..23926e6f6741
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/libdrm.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright © 2014 NVIDIA Corporation
> > + *
> > + * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
> > + * copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
> > + * to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
> > + * the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
> > + * and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
> > + * Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
> > + *
> > + * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
> > + * all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
> > + *
> > + * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
> > + * IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
> > + * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.  IN NO EVENT SHALL
> > + * THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER(S) OR AUTHOR(S) BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR
> > + * OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE,
> > + * ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR
> > + * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
> > + */
> > +
> > +#ifndef LIBDRM_LIBDRM_H
> > +#define LIBDRM_LIBDRM_H
> 
> LIBDRM_LIBDRM_H sounds a bit clunky to me. Why LIBDRM twice? The other
> headers don't seem to prefix LIBDRM_ to their header-guards. In fact,
> many of them don't even have header-guards.

This was with the intention of marking it as an internal header file. So
the LIBDRM_ prefix could be used consistently for all files that are not
installed. xf86atomic.h uses that prefix as well.

> Also, does these macro really warrant making a top-level, generically
> named header?

There isn't really another header file where this would fit. Others are
either installed (and therefore shouldn't be exposing these macros) or
have a very specific purpose (xf86atomic.h).

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20140502/4a0ac752/attachment.sig>