On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Andreas Beck wrote: > > Does someone know the original reason why the DGA target kept a private > > implementation of the XFDGA protocol extension? > > This is due to a horrid versionning nightmare while the XFree 3->4 > Transition, where we found that many systems had broken headers and would > not compile right.
Hmmm... Thanks. This raises an interesting question... Do we want to go through the extra effort of keeping compile working on machines with dubious headers, or are we satisfied if a display-x sublib must be built with good headers, because if it is, theoretically it will still run on all versions of the server when the binary is installed on the machine? IIRC right now our xf86dga compile is broken if the compiling machine is using the XFree86 3.x development files, but the compiled target will run on those machines just the same. It is a signifigant task to keep fixed headers when more X extensions are added (assuming those extensions contain breakages). If the broken headers thing is still very widespread there may be a case for it, but since we are modularizing the X extensions into helper libs we could just disable compile at configure time and pump a warning out to the builder that his headers are broken. Christoph: yes, the helpers will be subdirs of display-x. -- Brian
