RFR(S): 8214343: Handle the absence of Xrandr more generically

Thomas Stüfe thomas.stuefe at gmail.com
Tue Nov 27 14:03:29 UTC 2018


Looks good Volker. I agree, NO_XRANDR is reasonable and better than HAVE_XRANDR.

I have to say, the amount of work this took is insane for the size of
the problem involved.

Cheers, Thomas

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 2:54 PM Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> can I please have a review for the following trivial change which
> handles the absence of Xrandr more generically:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2018/8214343/
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214343
>
> Change JDK-8213944 fixed the build on AIX (which has no Xrandr) by
> conditionally excluding the relevant parts on AIX with the help of
> preprocessor defines. On the mailing lists the wish was expressed to
> handle the absence of Xrandr more generically during the configure
> step, so here comes the corresponding change.
>
> In contrast to the suggestions on the previous mail thread I define
> "NO_XRENDER" if we're configuring on AIX. This avoids clobbering all
> the other platforms which support Xrandr with yet another command line
> define of the form "-DHAVE_XRANDR". Instead, only the corresponding
> compiler options on AIX will now contain "-DNO_XRANDR". Other
> platforms which don't support Xrandr can now easily define NO_XRANDR
> as well.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
> Volker


More information about the build-dev mailing list