> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:23:23 +0200 > From: Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:23:53PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Mark Kettenis <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >> From: Jamey Sharp <[email protected]> > > >> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:48:32 +0200 > > >> > > >> diff --git a/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c > > >> b/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c > > >> index 6b2ae97..ab07b60 100644 > > >> --- a/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c > > >> +++ b/hw/xfree86/modes/xf86Cursors.c > > >> @@ -227,11 +227,7 @@ xf86_set_cursor_colors (ScrnInfoPtr scrn, int bg, > > >> int fg) > > >> CursorPtr cursor = xf86_config->cursor; > > >> int c; > > >> CARD8 *bits = cursor ? > > >> -#if XORG_VERSION_CURRENT < XORG_VERSION_NUMERIC(7,0,0,0,0) > > >> dixLookupPrivate(&cursor->devPrivates, CursorScreenKey(screen)) > > >> -#else > > >> - cursor->devPriv[screen->myNum] > > >> -#endif > > > > > > Wait a moment. You're keeping the code that's used for *older* Xorg > > > versions in favour of the code used in newer versions? > > > > I know it looks that way, but it isn't true. I don't understand what > > the ifdef actually means, but the dix function call is definitely the > > current API. > > from the commit that introduced it: > This change uses XORG_VERSION_CURRENT < 7.0 to mean "server newer > than 1.2" since XORG_VERSION current went backwards at some point.
Oh, brilliant! In that case, I'm very much in favour of this diff.
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
