xf86-input-evdev: Changes to 'master'

[Peter Hutterer]

On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 10:39:27PM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 01:13:35AM -0200, Paulo César Pereira de Andrade wrote:
> >> >>   But I think a better approach should be found for pkg-config
> >> >> variables, as creating a configure option is basically only to
> >> >> correct make distcheck.
> >> >
> >> > can you please explain what's wrong with make distcheck that it requires
> >> > fixing?
> >>
> >>   make distcheck can be seen as a test of a build and install in
> >> a controlled environment. It checks if the tarball contains all
> >> the files required to build the package, among other tests.
> >>
> >>   The problem in the xf86-input-evdev was it attempting to install
> >> files outside of DESTDIR. Actually, if you run make distcheck as
> >> root user, it will work. As will it work if you specify a wrong
> >> destdir but with correct permissions (usually a path not starting
> >> with / and installing in the build directory), and not cause any
> >> warnings.
> >
> > It will also work if you set up the PKG_CONFIG_PATH correctly.
> >
> > The properties header file is installed where the xserver installs the same
> > header file (xserver-properties.h).
> > Yes, this may be outside of the prefix, but it's where the other xorg header
> > files go too. AFAIC this is the right place to put them.
> 
> It is the right place to put them. However, part of the distcheck
> process is checking that "make install" only installs files under
> $prefix. I say that's a stupid check, but I also think that having
> distcheck pass is a good thing because it uncovers a lot of packaging
> bugs. AFAIK, there isn't a way to override that part of distcheck.
> 
> > I'm happy to add* a configure-time option for those that want the header
> > somewhere else. But auto-guessing just to "fix" make distcheck on your machine
> > is not the right thing to do. And I would have appreciated if you would have
> > sent the patch to the list for review first before breaking evdev.
> 
> Attached is a patch that should add the appropriate workaround. No
> help text is added for the --with-sdkdir option so that people don't
> get the idea that they want to use this option.

applied the patch locally, ran make distcheck and it still fails. Am I doing
anything wrong?
AFAICT from a quick peek, ${includedir} isn't expanded. Can you double-check
this please?

Cheers,
  Peter