On 14 July 2016 at 17:49, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 05:29:55PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> Hi Marius, >> >> Just double-checking - this is an i-g-t patch, isn't it ? >> >> On 14 July 2016 at 11:39, Marius Vlad <marius.c.vlad@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Required by commit 2603b98ca (aubdump: Support softpin bos). >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Marius Vlad <marius.c.vlad@xxxxxxxxx> >> > CC: Kristian Høgsberg Kristensen <kristian.h.kristensen@xxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > configure.ac | 2 +- >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac >> > index f05bcb0..ade9756 100644 >> > --- a/configure.ac >> > +++ b/configure.ac >> > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ if test "x$GCC" = "xyes"; then >> > fi >> > AC_SUBST(ASSEMBLER_WARN_CFLAGS) >> > >> > -PKG_CHECK_MODULES(DRM, [libdrm_intel >= 2.4.64 libdrm]) >> > +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(DRM, [libdrm_intel >= 2.4.68 libdrm]) >> Yes please. As you do that one can nuke most/all the "define LOCAL_" >> and "struct local_" (in lib/ioctl_wrappers.h) >> and replace with with the official symbols. A very nice plus imho ;-) > > Please don't. It makes running on older installations even more > cumbersome. Slightly confused here: are you against the libdrm_intel bump, or the removal of the local symbols ? Admittedly sometimes distros don't bother/refuse to update libdrm which could be an issue in the former case. Although if the package (with all the definitions) is compulsory, how would that cause an issue ? Genuine question here, not trying to be smart/cheeky/etc. Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
