[PATCH] Port of xbacklight to XCB
memsize at videotron.ca
Sun Jan 29 16:01:14 PST 2012
On 12-01-29 04:53 PM, Jon Lund Steffensen wrote:
> 2012/1/29 Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca>:
>> On 12-01-29 09:02 AM, Jon Lund Steffensen wrote:
>> I've ported xbacklight to XCB; patch below. I'm posting it here in
>> case anyone is interested.
>> configure.ac | 2 +-
>> xbacklight.c | 272
>> 2 files changed, 165 insertions(+), 109 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
>> index 2c67604..87c7b26 100644
>> --- a/configure.ac
>> +++ b/configure.ac
>> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ XORG_DEFAULT_OPTIONS
>> # Checks for pkg-config packages
>> -PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XRANDR, xrandr >= 1.2.0 x11)
>> +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XRANDR, [xcb-randr >= 1.2 xcb-atom xcb-aux xcb])
>> I recall seeing an app ported to xcb which still needed xproto for some
>> header file. You can confirm by running 'make uninstall' on x11proto and
>> libX11 just to be sure.
> It compiles without those so I guess that answers the question.
>> I don't see an xcb-atom or an xcb-aux pc file in libxcb
>> Am I looking at the wrong place?
>> Consider providing the git url for the new dependencies in the commit text
>> as it was not obvious to find.
> Sure. They are here: http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xcb/util/tree/
> Upon further research it appears to me that I don't need xcb-atom for
> anything. Perhaps I should also include <xcb/xcb_aux.h> instead of
> <xcb/xcb_util.h> as the latter includes the former plus some extra
> stuff that is not needed. Does this sound correct?
It does to me. I don't know the xcb code, but it looks like the util
package took great care to separate atom/aux/event from each other,
including the pc files. The xcb_util.h is just an aggregation of the
three other header files for convenience purpose.
>> You may also want to check if the tinderbox build box has those in the
>> jhbuild build script.
More information about the xorg-devel