On 3 November 2014 00:23, Tanu Kaskinen <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: > On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 23:52 +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote: >> On 2 November 2014 23:30, Tanu Kaskinen <tanu.kaskinen at linux.intel.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 23:28 +0100, Peter Meerwald wrote: >> >> if bluez development files are not installed, compilation of the >> >> recently added native headset backend fails: >> >> >> >> CC modules/bluetooth/libbluez5_util_la-backend-native.lo >> >> modules/bluetooth/backend-native.c:36:33: fatal error: bluetooth/bluetooth.h: No such file or directory >> >> #include <bluetooth/bluetooth.h> >> >> >> >> this patch adds a check for bluez >= 4.101 >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Meerwald <pmeerw at pmeerw.net> >> >> --- >> >> configure.ac | 4 ++++ >> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac >> >> index f165eb4..6e45dc6 100644 >> >> --- a/configure.ac >> >> +++ b/configure.ac >> >> @@ -1046,6 +1046,10 @@ fi >> >> AS_IF([test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xofono" && test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xnull" && test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" != "xnative"], >> >> [AC_MSG_ERROR([*** Invalid Bluetooth Headset backend])]) >> >> >> >> +AS_IF([test "x$BLUETOOTH_HEADSET_BACKEND" = "xnative"], >> >> + [PKG_CHECK_MODULES(BLUEZ, [ bluez >= 4.101 ], [], >> >> + [AC_MSG_ERROR([*** BLUEZ library not found (required by native headset backend)])])]) >> >> + >> > >> > I think we shouldn't fail if the backend wasn't explicitly set by the >> > user. I'm not sure what the fallback should be... should we select the >> > ofono backend instead? Or null? I'd probably vote falling back to ofono. >> >> I thought we had native as the default already -- any reason that should change? > > The fallback would be used in case native is not available due to > missing deps. Native would still be default if all dependencies are > available. I prefer the current mechanism: if no backend is specified, we pick 'native' and ask for the bluez headers to be there (basically just saying that bluez is a compile-time in addition to the fact that it is already a run-time dependency). The first error condition above catches an explicitly specified backend that is not in the list. One condition that is missing, though - the entire backend check should only be done if we have --enable-bluez5 (an should error out with --enable-bluez4). -- Arun
