[Xcb] demo/util fixes for the extension split

[Vincent Torri]

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006, Josh Triplett wrote:

> Barton C Massey wrote:
> > I think Josh wants to autogenerate the .pcs for extensions
> > from some kind of XML description, which is why your patch
> > hasn't yet been committed.  We should probably just commit
> > it, though; we can always back it out when we get the fancy
> > thing working.
>
> Yes, I do (along with the Debian packaging, the Makefile.am, and
> anything else that has a list of all the extensions), but I plan to
> review and commit Vincent's .pc.in file patch this afternoon as a
> short-term unbreaking.  Thanks Vincent.
>
> We do need to make sure even in the short-term unbreak patch, though,
> that the .pc.in files and the Debian packaging express the appropriate
> dependencies based on the <import> elements in the protocol
> descriptions, which introduce corresponding #include directives in the
> extension headers.

With those .pc files, i've fixed xcb-utils, xcb-demo and evas, that is
i've only added in PKG_CHECK_MODULE the needed extension package, that's
all. Nothing changed in the code itself. I don't know for debian, as I
have a Mandrake, that is now more a LFS than anything else :)

Vincent