[PATCH weston] build: Define wayland prereq version

[Emil Velikov]

On 12 May 2016 at 09:13, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:12:28 +1000
> Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 01:18:59PM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>> > Establishes a single variable for defining the libwayland version
>> > requirements.  Enforces the same version dependency between
>> > libwayland-client and libwayland-server, as recommended by pq in the
>> > 1.11 release discussions.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Bryce Harrington <bryce at osg.samsung.com>
>> > ---
>> >  configure.ac | 12 +++++++-----
>> >  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>> > index 2ca1f4e..0b23fc4 100644
>> > --- a/configure.ac
>> > +++ b/configure.ac
>> > @@ -4,6 +4,8 @@ m4_define([weston_micro_version], [91])
>> >  m4_define([weston_version],
>> >            [weston_major_version.weston_minor_version.weston_micro_version])
>> >
>> > +m4_define([WAYLAND_PREREQ_VERSION], "1.10.0")
>>
>> how comes the line above uses [] and here you use ""? is that intentional?
>> (I keep forgetting whether there's a difference between the two in m4)
>
> Yeah, I'm not that sure about using a m4 define. It is one way to do
> it, but the quotes do look suspicious.
>
> FWIW, Mesa uses a big list of common dependency variables too, maybe
> copy that approach?
>
> CC'ing Quentin and Emil, they probably know what's good.
>
In all honesty I don't know which one is better, so any
info/references will be appreciated. For the time being (personally)
I'd stick with the following as it reads a bit easier ;-)

WAYLAND_PREREQ_VERSION="1.10.0"

Thanks
Emil