On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 09:41:19AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 01/ 7/11 03:10 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 12:51:17AM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> >>> diff --git a/include/colormapst.h b/include/colormapst.h
> >>> index 0ba5bd0..b597e2c 100644
> >>> --- a/include/colormapst.h
> >>> +++ b/include/colormapst.h
> >>> @@ -103,12 +103,12 @@ typedef struct _ColormapRec
> >>> {
> >>> VisualPtr pVisual;
> >>> short class; /* PseudoColor or DirectColor */
> >>> -#if defined(_XSERVER64)
> >>> +#if defined(_LP64)
> >>> short pad0;
> >>> XID pad1;
> >>> #endif
> >>> XID mid; /* client's name for colormap */
> >>> -#if defined(_XSERVER64) && (X_BYTE_ORDER == X_LITTLE_ENDIAN)
> >>> +#if defined(_LP64) && (X_BYTE_ORDER == X_LITTLE_ENDIAN)
> >>> XID pad2;
> >>> #endif
> >>> ScreenPtr pScreen; /* screen map is associated with */
> >>
> >> This bit puzzles me. Can you explain why it is necessary if
> >> xorg-server.h continues to define _XSERVER64 when appropriate?
> >
> > Hm, wasn't that just fixing breakage of a previous ABI, i.e. can now be
> > removed?
>
> Is Keith still taking in ABI breaks for 1.10 this late, or would that be
> deferred to the next merge window?I thought they were still being accepted until the next release (e.g. ConstrainCursorHarder, possibly RandR 1.4 bits), but I could be wrong. Cheers, Daniel
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
