On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:54:08AM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: > On 05/20/2012 02:55 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 01:23:32PM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: > >> Due to the default automake compilation flags including -I. -I.., it is > >> possible to pick up an xorg-gtest header like device.h instead of a > >> project header. Namespacing the headers should resolve this issue. Users > >> should be including xorg-gtest.h instead of individual headers, so this > >> should not cause compilation failures. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Chase Douglas <[email protected]> > >> --- > >> include/Makefile.am | 8 +- > >> include/xorg/gtest/environment.h | 184 > >> -------------------------- > >> include/xorg/gtest/evemu/device.h | 91 ------------- > >> include/xorg/gtest/evemu/xorg-gtest_device.h | 91 +++++++++++++ > >> include/xorg/gtest/process.h | 166 > >> ----------------------- > >> include/xorg/gtest/test.h | 104 --------------- > >> include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest.h | 8 +- > >> include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_environment.h | 184 > >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_process.h | 166 > >> +++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_test.h | 104 +++++++++++++++ > >> 10 files changed, 553 insertions(+), 553 deletions(-) > >> delete mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/environment.h > >> delete mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/evemu/device.h > >> create mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/evemu/xorg-gtest_device.h > >> delete mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/process.h > >> delete mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/test.h > >> create mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_environment.h > >> create mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_process.h > >> create mode 100644 include/xorg/gtest/xorg-gtest_test.h > > > > tbh i'm not a big fan of a xorg-gtest_test naming. Can't we just use dashes? > > It's a bit too late for xorg-gtest_main.cpp, so I'd prefer to stick the > the same semantics throughout xorg-gtest. It's not perfect, I probably > would pick different semantics if I were to do it over again, but these > header file names are just an implementation detail, so meh.
really too late? how many users are out there? judging from e1c010f23272e61c28c73aa603b477ba6fbae875 the rename was incomplete anyway, there are a few source files left that reference the old headers still (see the patch I just sent out) Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
