<AWT Dev> Taking screenshots on x11 composite desktop produce wrong result

[Semyon Sadetsky]

Hello Mario,

I will arrange a new JPRT run this week.

--Semyon

On 04.07.2016 15:14, Mario Torre wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:40 PM, Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Ping?
> Ping Ping?
>
>> Cheers,
>> Mario
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 6:47 PM, Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Semyon Sadetsky
>>> <semyon.sadetsky at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 6/1/2016 2:39 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Semyon Sadetsky
>>>>> <semyon.sadetsky at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I ran JPRT build. It seems that the build server does not have the
>>>>>> requested
>>>>>> header:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /opt/jprt/T/P1/102200.ssadetsk/s/jdk/src/java.desktop/unix/native/libawt_xawt/awt/awt_Robot.c:40:39:
>>>>>> fatal error: X11/extensions/Xcomposite.h: No such file or directory
>>>>>>    #include <X11/extensions/Xcomposite.h>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> someone need to install Xcomposite library there
>>>>>>
>>>>> Should this be made optional?
>>>>>
>>>>> I can do some dlsym hack if necessary (I would prefer to avoid that
>>>>> though).
>>>> Apparently dlsym is the shortest way to fix that issue and you don't need to
>>>> modify the makefile in that case.
>>> Well, to be honest, I think Xcomposite should just be a requirement, I
>>> believe all the systems that OpenJDK 9 targets as "supported" have
>>> that library, it just needs to be installed.
>>>
>>> Anyway, this is the patch with the dl-stuff hacks:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8150954/webrev.06/
>>>
>>> The only question I have is where to unload the library, I gave a look
>>> at what the XToolkit code does with GTK, and it seems that it's just
>>> never unloaded (there's a method to unload the library, but looks like
>>> it's never used anywhere, except, of course, if some functions fail to
>>> load in the first place, which is what I also do here). I think this
>>> is not a real problem though, so rather than making the whole code a
>>> lot more complex I would keep it that way, YMMV.
>>>
>>> I believe I need again two approvals now.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Mario