nx-libs
nx-libs copied to clipboard
ArcticaProject
Pr/simplify derivations
I want to know if this has chances to get merged, from a license point of view. It it okay to handle derived code like I do here?
On Di 21 Mai 2019 11:53:10 CEST, Ulrich Sibiller wrote:
uli42 commented on this pull request.
@@ -248,7 +248,7 @@ NXAGENTOBJS = hw/nxagent/miinitext.o
hw/nxagent/NXglxext.o
hw/nxagent/NXmiexpose.o
hw/nxagent/NXresource.o \
hw/nxagent/NXdamage.o \
hw/nxagent/damage.o \It is the same as with some other linked files: NXdamage.c did not
have any code left after cleanup, but in dix/damage.c there are
NXAGENT_SERVER ifdefs. That define is only set during nxagent
compilation, but not during dix compilation.
Ok.
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM c\o Technik- und Ökologiezentrum Eckernförde Mike Gabriel, Marienthaler str. 17, 24340 Eckernförde mobile: +49 (1520) 1976 148 landline: +49 (4354) 8390 139
GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22 0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31 mail: [email protected], http://das-netzwerkteam.de
Hi,
On Di 21 Mai 2019 20:21:29 CEST, Ulrich Sibiller wrote:
uli42 commented on this pull request.
if (imageblt)(*pGC->ops->ImageGlyphBlt)(pDrawable, pGC, x, y, n, charinfo, FONTGLYPHS(pGC->font));else (*pGC->ops->PolyGlyphBlt)(pDrawable, pGC, x, y, n, charinfo, FONTGLYPHS(pGC->font)); +#endif
I have taken another look into this and found I have made a mistake.
This must be an #ifndef instead of #ifdef. I guess disabling code is
ok, license wise. Right?
Yes, disabling original Xserver code should be ok license wise. At
least, let's assume that.
Mike
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM c\o Technik- und Ökologiezentrum Eckernförde Mike Gabriel, Marienthaler str. 17, 24340 Eckernförde mobile: +49 (1520) 1976 148 landline: +49 (4354) 8390 139
GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22 0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31 mail: [email protected], http://das-netzwerkteam.de
Ok, and what about simply calling an existing function? Is that ok or do we need a wrapper, too? I am thinking about this:
#ifdef NXAGENT_SERVER
nxagentFlushConfigureWindow();
#endif
Hi,
Am Mittwoch, 22. Mai 2019 schrieb Ulrich Sibiller:
Ok, and what about simply calling an existing function? Is that ok or do we need a wrapper, too? I am thinking about this:
#ifdef NXAGENT_SERVER nxagentFlushConfigureWindow(); #endif
/me sighs. Dogdy case. Esp. the nxagent* is not ideal. I am thinking about patch acceptance (finally) on the Xorg upstream side. So, consider... Is that call really needed? How do other hardware DDXs handle such hook calls?
Mike
-- Gesendet von meinem Fairphone2 (powered by Sailfish OS).
That's the problem with most of NX's changes: It's no easy to judge... Generally one could add hooks here and there. But you cannot have them everywhere without cluttering the whole upstream code.
I am tempted to drop changes that are enclosed in ifdef TEST or DEBUG. And changes that simply print something. But there are also changes the really look important...
Hi,
On Mi 22 Mai 2019 17:20:51 CEST, Ulrich Sibiller wrote:
That's the problem with most of NX's changes: It's no easy to
judge... Generally one could add hooks here and there. But you
cannot have them everywhere without cluttering the whole upstream
code.
Yes, I get that.
I am tempted to drop changes that are enclosed in ifdef TEST or
DEBUG. And changes that simply print something.
Please do. Feel tempted.
But there are also changes the really look important...
Truely spoken. And yet, we don't know... (urgh).
Mike
DAS-NETZWERKTEAM c\o Technik- und Ökologiezentrum Eckernförde Mike Gabriel, Marienthaler str. 17, 24340 Eckernförde mobile: +49 (1520) 1976 148 landline: +49 (4354) 8390 139
GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22 0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31 mail: [email protected], http://das-netzwerkteam.de
@uli42: is PR #805 ready for a second review iteration? Please rebase beforehand. Thanks.
no, currently this is not uptodate. I will alert when it's time for another review. Currently I try to pull out commits from here into separate branches to get stuff included that can clearly be merged.
ACK. Mike
Am Dienstag, 11. Juni 2019 schrieb Ulrich Sibiller:
no, currently this is not uptodate. I will alert when it's time for another review. Currently I try to pull out commits from here into separate branches to get stuff included that can clearly be merged.
-- You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/ArcticaProject/nx-libs/pull/805#issuecomment-50079929
-- Gesendet von meinem Fairphone2 (powered by Sailfish OS).
@uli42: What's the status of the PR (#805)? Is it ready for review again? I left some requests / comments. Please get in touch.
All the current PRs are preconditions to this. Once they are merged I will go in with this one. And Once it is merged I finally can complete my 1.4.2 patch. At least that's the plan...
Uli
Mike Gabriel [email protected] schrieb am Sa., 10. Aug. 2019, 14:03:
@uli42 https://github.com/uli42: What's the status of the PR (#805 https://github.com/ArcticaProject/nx-libs/pull/805)? Is it ready for review again? I left some requests / comments. Please get in touch.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ArcticaProject/nx-libs/pull/805?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABQHBZF6WHVYE242VGMBHBLQD2VBXA5CNFSM4HMS72I2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4AMGBQ#issuecomment-520143622, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABQHBZGPCOMNBG7FCOIMBH3QD2VBXANCNFSM4HMS72IQ .
I have now split this up, see #858 to #869. Some NXwindow commits are left, I need to rework them because of "incompatible license" issues.