> On 24 May 2017, at 10:46, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 07:05:18PM +0200, Christophe de Dinechin wrote: >>> , another alternative would be to have a --enable-alignment-debug, >> >> I tried that, but the problem is to keep that consistent between >> spice-common and spice-gdk (they may have different configuration). Do >> you have a similar case? If so, how do you deal with that? > > Why would they have different configuration? AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS is going > to pass the command line args to spice-common configure script, which > will set (or not set) a SPICE_CHECK_ALIGNMENT #define. There might be a > small added difficulty of making sure #include <mem.h> pick up that > #define both when one from files in spice-common/ and in spice-gtk/, but > that should be workable? > Or am I missing something? In practice, I ran into unsatisfied symbols when switching between configurations with the flag set or not. They went away when I did a clean build, but I found this annoying. Maybe there is just some missing dependency between mem.c and config.h? Let me try again, I may have mis-interpreted what was happening. > >> >> (I could for example always leave the runtime routines in >> spice-common, even if checks are disabled there, so that you don’t get >> unsatisfied symbols. But that seems a bit ugly). >> >> >>> or something like glib (SPICE_XXX_DEBUG=alignment:foo:bar) >> >> Sorry, I did not really understand that. Do you mean a run-time flag >> check? If so, since Frediano was objecting a one-instruction runtime >> check, I think a runtime flag check would not convince him either. > > Ah, if runtime checks are out, forget this ;) > > Christophe _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel