On 6/27/11 3:04 AM, Adam Tkac wrote: > although I'm generally against inclusion of other sources in our code, > you know portability issues best. If the patch against fltk will be so > big, we can include fltk in our svn repo. It will make building of > TigerVNC easier and changes in fltk upstream can be pulled into our tree.
I have completed this, and a stripped-down version of FLTK 1.3.0 with our patches applied is in common/fltk. It works just like the in-tree version of Zlib: If USE_INCLUDED_FLTK=1, it is always used. Otherwise, it is only used if FLTK detection fails or if the detected version of FLTK doesn't pass the extensions tests. Let me know if any problems are discovered. Personally, I think this instantly improved the ease of building TigerVNC by about 1000%. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey _______________________________________________ Tigervnc-devel mailing list Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
