[PATCH xserver 8/8] Remove unused vtSysreq
jamey at minilop.net
Fri Sep 16 14:03:44 PDT 2011
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 09:13:09PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> On 09/15/11 20:51, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 06:42:59PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> >>On 09/15/11 13:07, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> >>>It looks to me like you should also delete VTSYSRQ from
> >>Please ensure that any changes result in the X server simply ignoring
> >>the VTSysReq option in existing xorg.conf and not erroring out& refusing
> >>to start on a file that happens to have a no-longer-useful option in.
> >If I understand the parser correctly (and I probably don't), it's
> >already too late for that: while there's a VTSYSRQ entry in the enum in
> >xf86tokens.h, nothing generates that token type. Instead, there's a
> >VTSysReq ServerFlag. So deleting the token from the enum is not a
> >regression, I think.
> >I can't figure out at a quick glance whether unknown ServerFlags are
> >treated as an error, though. Does the patch need to somehow make this
> >flag be explicitly ignored if present?
> Honestly, I don't remember - probably easiest to just test starting the
> server (when built with this series) using an xorg.conf with the entry added.
I just tested 1.11 with ServerFlags 'Option "NoSuchOption" "blag"' and
didn't get any messages about it in the log. The server started up fine.
> I just remember prior issues here (see commits e0a451eb7cc & d2cf562bbad
> from prior obsoletion - though those seem to be keywords, not options)
I saw commits along those lines, but I guess they aren't relevant here.
Alexandr, my comment stands: if you delete VTSYSRQ from xf86tokens.h you
can add my Reviewed-by tag to this patch.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the xorg-devel