<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.26.0"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 10:17 -0700, Keith Packard wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:12:39 -0700, Dan Nicholson <<A HREF="mailto:dbn.lists@gmail.com">dbn.lists@gmail.com</A>> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Keith Packard <<A HREF="mailto:keithp@keithp.com">keithp@keithp.com</A>> wrote: > > On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 02:33:22 -0500, "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <<A HREF="mailto:yselkowitz@users.sourceforge.net">yselkowitz@users.sourceforge.net</A>> wrote: > > > >> 6) Please tell me you're not planning on releasing this package with the > >> name "proto". :-) > > > > Oh. Yeah, probably not the best name. 'xproto'? 'xprotocol'? > > Well, considering we already have 'xproto' as one of the individual > modules, it might make sense to go with 'xorg-proto'. That would be > nicely synced with 'xorg-server'. Eric came up with an obvious solution here. We simply take over the existing 'xproto' package and start with that existing version number. It's not tied to any protocol visible number at all. I'll plan on bumping that to '7.1.0'. Seem reasonable? Then we switch the X server to depending only on that package with that version number. We can still install the other .pc files for backwards compatibility, but future changes would want to use only the xproto version number. </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> I like that. I am not sure, but are the old *.pc realy needed? It adds a little bit to existing complexity: <BLOCKQUOTE> 1. individual protos can be installed using different $prefixes, so we have identical pc filename in two locations 2. having dri2proto.pc, for example, would suggest $prefix/proto/dri2proto is installed but it may or may not be. 3. installing a downlevel dri2proto using same prefix would overwrite the pc file installed by xserver-proto </BLOCKQUOTE> For backward compatibility, if config file ask for old package, then old package should be installed. As for xproto itself, we need to make sure it won't suffer from previous versions being installed. Otherwise, it may be better to use a new name all together. Again, not sure, consider these statements as test cases. On another note, should the xproto.pc be installed in "share" ($datadir) rather than "lib" ($libdir) directory? All protos are architecture independent. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> _______________________________________________ <A HREF="mailto:xorg-devel@lists.x.org">xorg-devel@lists.x.org</A>: X.Org development Archives: <A HREF="http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel">http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel</A> Info: <A HREF="http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel">http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel</A> </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML>