On 12 April 2017 at 23:05, Aaron Plattner <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/12/2016 04:31 PM, Emil Velikov wrote:
>> Since xf86platformBus.h is part of the SDK, If we do this, then the >> new header must become one as well (should be listed in sdk_HEADERS). >> Alternatively we can forward declare XF86MatchedDrivers and include >> the header in EXTRA_DIST. Not sure if the latter is a good idea >> though, since the actual ABI will be undefined/private. >> >> Or better yet, neither of the two exported symbols >> (xf86PlatformDeviceCheckBusID, xf86PlatformMatchDriver) is used and >> imho we can remove them. Seems that the header is used solely for the >> ODEV management, which isn't platform devices specific and one can >> just move those parts into a separate header and use _it_ in the SDK ? >> >> But all that (everything but the sdk_HEADERS/EXTRA_DIST fix) is added >> bogus, which shouldn't stop the patch from landing. > Another customer ran into this recently. Adam, can this be merged? I don't > think Emil's reply was a nack. Precisely. My earlier message should have read: xf86MatchDrivers.h must be in the sdk_HEADERS or you'll need build hacks in each driver. With that the patch is Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <[email protected]> Regards, Emil _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
