<AWT Dev> [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [PATCH FOR APPROVAL]: Fix broken build on newer versions of X11 (libXext >= 1.1.0)

[Jim Graham]

Yes, indeed, that all makes sense for your fix.  I wasn't intending to 
register an objection with the fix, I was just curious about the changes 
they made which, as you say, seem quite convoluted...

			...jim

Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> 2009/11/3 Jim Graham <Jim.A.Graham at sun.com>:
>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> There's http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2009-June/001242.html
>>> but I avoided posting this in the original mail because it seems to
>>> have changed again between that commit and the final release,
>>> presumably due to compatibility issues (XShm.h is back and it's now
>>> shmproto.h as seen in the patch).  I've built the repo with this patch
>>> here with the old version, and others have built it with the new
>>> version; it does work for both.  The same patch is already in Gentoo's
>>> ebuild and IcedTea, and a similar patch has been used for the Fedora
>>> rawhide RPMs for some time.  It would be good to get it upstream as
>>> well.
>> At first I was going to ask how the existing #include succeeds when the link
>> says that Xshm.h is going away, but now I see that you said they brought it
>> back.  What is it now?  Just an empty include to prevent #include failures?
>>  (I don't see how that works since the build will break anyway as soon as a
>> missing constant is referenced...?)
>>
>> (It seems odd that they bring it back to [not really] avoid build breakages,
>> but then don't just have it include the new split files to finish the
>> "backwards compatibility" story...?)
>>
>>                        ...jim
>>
>>
> 
> It's quite convoluted, that's why I was just going to avoid posting
> the link, as it makes things even more confusing.  I believe the
> reinstated XShm.h does have content that was still needed.
> 
> The initial version I linked to did remove XShm.h, so the original fix
> for Fedora 12 removed XShm.h, added the two additional headers and
> defined some other stuff which I believe was in XShm.h originally.  It
> was a pretty nasty patch, hence why it wasn't committed to IcedTea or
> OpenJDK.  I gather now that XShm.h is back and has the additional
> material in it.  I don't have a copy locally to check, but several
> people have said this fix works and Fedora RPMs have been built with
> the original fix.  More importantly, I have confirmed myself that it
> doesn't break earlier versions, which are still used on the majority
> of systems.  It's now several months on from our initial discovery of
> the problem and more and more people are asking about this in e-mail
> and on IRC, so a general fix is needed and this fits the bill.
> 
> Hope that makes some sense!
> 
> Thanks,