[PATCH weston] build: Define wayland prereq version
ppaalanen at gmail.com
Thu May 12 09:28:00 UTC 2016
On Thu, 12 May 2016 11:05:08 +0200
Quentin Glidic <sardemff7+wayland at sardemff7.net> wrote:
> On 12/05/2016 10:48, Emil Velikov wrote:
> > 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], )
> >>>> 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"
> This form ↑ (shell variable) is the most common one I know.
> AFAICT, Autoconf is not using pure m4 quotation, so the " are part of
> the macro definition, thus the pkg-config call will be:
> pkg-config --cflags wayland-server >= "3"
> It works because pkg-config handles the extra quotes.
> Unrelated to quoting: shouldn’t we keep the client/server split? In the
> current state, we require an higher server version, so it doesn’t
> matter, but if clients rely on a newer feature, does it make sense to
> force that same server version even though we can disable clients?
Who actually builds and tests Weston without either libwayland-client
I never do, and I doubt there are many (any?) people that do and would
also benefit from keeping the reqs separate.
However, if we do keep the reqs separate while no-one tests them
separately, one of them is going to be broken. So IMO merging the reqs
into just one version is much better: just one version to bump as
needed, less hidden failure modes. This is the whole point of this
patch. Less surprises, less combinations for testing.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the wayland-devel