Hi, On 25 August 2015 at 00:32, Bryce Harrington <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 12:32:33PM -0500, Derek Foreman wrote: >> On 24/08/15 06:27 AM, Pekka Paalanen wrote: >> > From: Pekka Paalanen <[email protected]> >> > >> > Bumping libdrm requirement by 3 years just for output connector name >> > constants was a bit much. Fix the problem introduced in >> > 89c49b3060a115e846ba1e7fbef94d14894244f2 by conditionally using the new >> > additions. >> > >> > Both VIRTUAL and DSI came in the same libdrm commit >> > 566c3ce877a4be72697e15cdfc421ce965f7c37d, so we check only for DSI. >> >> Hmm, this is somewhat gross. Is there a solid reason to care about >> people who want to run new weston and ancient libdrm? > > I've been on the other side of this equation. libdrm can be a royal > PITA to have to change out, I can totally imagine there are several > quite solid reasons one would want to run new weston and oldish libdrm.
Hm, how so? It doesn't break backwards compatibility, only adds new symbols; the only exception I can think of is Nouveau when it had its ABI break, but that was exceptional in a lot of ways. Cheers, Daniel _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
