On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 14:21, Simon Ser <contact@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, February 3rd, 2021 at 3:13 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > As said before, there are multiple ways to handle this without > > introducing yet another UAPI header. I don't see why you're dismissing > > all of them, can you elaborate? > > Because I hate it when I have to adjust my compiler flags because of > some third-party header. > Mentioned it over IRC, but adding here for posterity: I think it's perfectly normal to be unhappy, angry, etc but please mention that upfront so that we know what we're working with. In this case, one gets to deal with the warning, if they _explicitly_ opts-in. That said, v2 should be warnings free in virtually any permutation. > Can you explain what were the past issues with introducing a new > header? Few that come to mind: - distros shipping partial header set - mixing headers, be that any of: - distros shipping kernel headers, as well as libdrm - system libdrm and local - be that imported or installed to /usr/local/ A bigger annoyance that just came to mind - having the same header name/guard within your project as the one introduced. So while it may seem like bikeshed, there are many subtle ways where things can go bad :-\ HTH Emil _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
