Hi Emil,
On 5 June 2018 at 12:41, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> > +#else
> >> > + ErrorF("xwayland glamor: eglstream backend support not
> >> > enabled\n");
> >> Something is really weird here:
> >>
> >> On one hand '-eglstream' is recognised and used (by potential user) on
> >> the other "... support is not _enabled_" is printed.
> >> Surely you meant "not built", right? After all explicitly passing the
> >> enable (runtime) flag should be enough to enable it ;-)
> >
> >
> > Yes, I literally mean "enabled at build time".
> >
> This wording is even better.
>
Eventually, in the updated series I am about to post in a minute, I opted
for the following wording:
"xwayland glamor: this build does not have eglstream support"
which, I reckon, seems like the most accurate description :)
Cheers,
Olivier
_______________________________________________
xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
