On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 10:57:04AM -0800, Mark Vojkovich wrote: >On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, [ISO-8859-1] Frank Gießler wrote: > >> Mark Vojkovich wrote: >> > We don't care what the filenames are except for the header files. >> > The only reason why we care about header files is that a driver >> > might include support for both and may need both include paths. >> > There's only one exported header file. I'd like to name it Xaa.h >> > to match the namespace. Is it really going to be relevant on >> > case-unaware systems? Which ones are those BTW? >> >> There is already xaa.h. Having Xaa.h included at the same time is a >> no-op for OS/2, for which there are already binaries for 4.4.0 available >> (I would therefore consider this a well supported platform). >> > > Well, then I guess I could call the header file xaa2.h
Not to be too picky, but won't this be the third version of XAA, not the second? David _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
