[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#633786: libdrm-nouveau1a: Doesn't Depends on a sufficiently recent version of libdrm2



On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 20:36:53 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:

> The following patch (applicable against version 1.0.8) seems to actually
> work:
> 
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 6f7f870..15c8402 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -84,6 +84,10 @@ PKG_CHECK_MODULES(LIBDRM_NOUVEAU, [libdrm_nouveau >= 2.4.25])
>  AC_SUBST(LIBDRM_NOUVEAU_CFLAGS)
>  AC_SUBST(LIBDRM_NOUVEAU_LIBS)
>  
> +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(LIBDRM, [libdrm >= 2.4.17])
> +AC_SUBST(LIBDRM_CFLAGS)
> +AC_SUBST(LIBDRM_LIBS)
> +

PKG_CHECK_MODULES does the AC_SUBST for these already.

>  PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XORG, [xorg-server >= 1.8] xproto fontsproto libdrm $REQUIRED_MODULES)
>  PKG_CHECK_MODULES(XEXT, [xextproto >= 7.0.99.1],
>  		  HAVE_XEXTPROTO_71="yes"; AC_DEFINE(HAVE_XEXTPROTO_71, 1, [xextproto 7.1 available]),
> diff --git a/src/Makefile.am b/src/Makefile.am
> index f54e135..5836ead 100644
> --- a/src/Makefile.am
> +++ b/src/Makefile.am
> @@ -23,10 +23,10 @@
>  # -avoid-version prevents gratuitous .0.0.0 version numbers on the end
>  # _ladir passes a dummy rpath to libtool so the thing will actually link
>  # TODO: -nostdlib/-Bstatic/-lgcc platform magic, not installing the .a, etc.
> -AM_CFLAGS = @XORG_CFLAGS@ @LIBUDEV_CFLAGS@ @LIBDRM_NOUVEAU_CFLAGS@
> +AM_CFLAGS = @XORG_CFLAGS@ @LIBUDEV_CFLAGS@ @LIBDRM_NOUVEAU_CFLAGS@ @LIBDRM_CFLAGS@
>  nouveau_drv_la_LTLIBRARIES = nouveau_drv.la
>  nouveau_drv_la_LDFLAGS = -module -avoid-version @LIBDRM_NOUVEAU_LIBS@ \
> -			 @LIBUDEV_LIBS@
> +			 @LIBUDEV_LIBS@ @LIBDRM_LIBS@
>  nouveau_drv_ladir = @moduledir@/drivers
>  
>  nouveau_drv_la_SOURCES = \
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> 
> I'm not really an autotools expert though, so I would prefer to get some
> feedback before I send it upstream.
> 
Other than the minor nit above, looks fine to me.

(Arguably the drivers should also be linked against pixman...)

Cheers,
Julien

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: