On Thu, 2010-03-25 at 18:18 -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On 2010-03-25 17:08, Gaetan Nadon wrote: > > That's the right thing to do. I tested the patches and found a scenario > > that fails. > > When a doctools v1.3 is present, the linuxdoc in hw/dmx/doc do not > > build. There is > > a requirement that an older "client" of util-macros behaves the same way > > when linked with a newer version. > > > > This should be relatively easy to fix. In util-macros v1.7, the code > > should revert to the v1.6 > > flawed behaviour when the doctools pc file is not found. It should not > > assume that the package > > is missing and that the sgml definitions are missing as well. > > Thanks for the review; revised patch sent to list. > > > Note this patch introduces a build order dependency where doctools be > > built before xserver. > > Nothing wrong with that, just need to check the build script. > > Only if you want to --enable-builddocs in xserver, just as before.
Yes > > > Once that's fixed, the release plan should be: > > > > util-macros v1.7 released first. > > doctools v1.4 with XORG_MACROS_VERSION(1.7) released second. > > The new doctools-1.4 does not need macros-1.7, it does not use > XORG_CHECK_SGML_DOCTOOLS nor the other macros affected by this change. > Right, old habit of mine > > Yaakov > Cygwin/X > _______________________________________________ > [email protected]: X.Org development > Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel > Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
