[pulseaudio-discuss] [PATCH] build-sys: Check for bluez package

[Arun Raghavan]

On 2 November 2014 23:30, Tanu Kaskinen <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 23:28 +0100, Peter Meerwald wrote:
>> if bluez development files are not installed, compilation of the
>> recently added native headset backend fails:
>>
>>   CC       modules/bluetooth/libbluez5_util_la-backend-native.lo
>> modules/bluetooth/backend-native.c:36:33: fatal error: bluetooth/bluetooth.h: No such file or directory
>>  #include <bluetooth/bluetooth.h>
>>
>> this patch adds a check for bluez >= 4.101
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Meerwald <pmeerw at pmeerw.net>
>> ---
>>  configure.ac | 4 ++++
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>> index f165eb4..6e45dc6 100644
>> --- a/configure.ac
>> +++ b/configure.ac
>> @@ -1046,6 +1046,10 @@ fi
>>  AS_IF([test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xofono" && test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xnull" && test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xnative"],
>>      [AC_MSG_ERROR([*** Invalid Bluetooth Headset backend])])
>>
>> +AS_IF([test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" = "xnative"],
>> +    [PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BLUEZ, [ bluez >= 4.101 ], [],
>> +        [AC_MSG_ERROR([*** BLUEZ library not found (required by native headset backend)])])])
>> +
>
> I think we shouldn't fail if the backend wasn't explicitly set by the
> user. I'm not sure what the fallback should be... should we select the
> ofono backend instead? Or null? I'd probably vote falling back to ofono.

I thought we had native as the default already -- any reason that should change?

-- Arun