[PATCH xserver 8/8] Remove unused vtSysreq

[Alexandr Shadchin]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 04:03:44PM -0500, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> 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
> > >>>hw/xfree86/parser/xf86tokens.h.
> > >>
> > >>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.
> 
> Jamey

I agree, delete VTSYSREQ from xf86tokens.h is correct. Option VTSysReq read only
in configServerFlags() and this place will be removed. Unknown options will be
ignored, as correctly noted Jamey. Also I tested on 1.11, started up fine.

-- 
Alexandr Shadchin