[PATCH fonts-util 2/2] If cross-compiling, we don't have to run mkfontdir
alan.coopersmith at oracle.com
Thu Sep 22 16:27:15 PDT 2011
On 09/20/11 06:00, Jon TURNEY wrote:
> On 17/09/2011 02:11, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> On 09/16/11 06:04, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>> On 16/09/2011 05:21, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>>>> On 09/12/11 07:18, Jon TURNEY wrote:
>>>>> +# XORG_FONT_MKFONTDIR()
>>>>> +# -------------------
>>>>> +# Minimum version: 1.1.1
>>>> Shouldn't that be 1.3.0 since we already released 1.2.0?
>>> Good catch, thank you.
>>> I think I'd prefer to write 1.2.1, as the next version number will be at least
>>> that, unless we know that the next version number used is going to be 1.3.0?
>> Like xorg-macros, if we're adding a new macro, then the next version number
>> will be incrementing the second part of the version (1.x.0), since the macros
>> we use for checking minimum version only check the first two parts of the
>> version number tuple, using the convention that in major.minor.patch releases,
>> patches fix bugs, minors add new APIs, majors break compatibility.
> Thanks for the explanation, that makes perfect sense. Is there something I need
> to do after applying this patch to ensure the next release is given the number
> 1.3.0 rather than 1.2.1? :-)
Bump the version number in configure.ac to 1.2.90 or .99 I guess.
> Revised patch attached.
Reviewed-by: Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at oracle.com>
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at oracle.com
Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System
More information about the xorg-devel