From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYWYa-0007xa-TK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:35:12 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYWYa-0007wr-Au
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:35:12 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GYWYa-0007wg-3b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:35:12 -0400
Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GYWh8-0001Kw-1T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:44:02 -0400
Message-ID: <453021BB.3010605@gmx.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:31:07 +0200
From: Martin Bochnig <mb1x@gmx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610131900280.9228@pali.cps.cmich.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0610131900280.9228@pali.cps.cmich.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Hello
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Ishwar Rattan wrote:

>
>
> I think the SDL source I downloaded is already prepatched.
> See the diff file below: my assumption is that --- indicates the
> original file and +++ the patched version (I might be wrong
> here). So, line in file with - in first column is reference to
> original file and is to be replaced by with line with + in
> first column.


Hi,

please ask Eric Lowe.
I did not prepare the x64/x86 stuff.
And the sdl amd64 bit patch is also from him.
The diff is not very big, that's true.
But it is not zero, I don't know.
I didn't build sdl for x64 so far.

I'm mostly "the sparc guy".
I had been busy all week long in improving the src to better support
sparc-hosts.
Therefore didn't I come to amd64 so far, while I do intend to asap.

See my diff from yesterday (which is meanwhile totally obsolete again) :

http://www.martux.org/qemu/qemu-0.8.2-solaris__20061010x11.gdiff

Pls. gimme time until I throw the sparc pkg out before I can deeper look
into amd64-HOST support.


Thanks,
Martin

>
> diff -ur SDL-1.2.11.orig/configure SDL-1.2.11.jnz/configure
> --- SDL-1.2.11.orig/configure Tue Jun 27 06:48:54 2006
> +++ SDL-1.2.11.jnz/configure Mon Sep 4 15:28:28 2006
> @@ -33170,10 +33170,10 @@
>
> if test "x$enable_rpath" = "xyes"; then
> if test $ARCH = bsdi -o $ARCH = freebsd -o $ARCH = irix -o $ARCH =
> linux -o $ARCH = netbsd; then
> - SDL_RLD_FLAGS="-Wl,-rpath,\${exec_prefix}/lib"
> + SDL_RLD_FLAGS="-Wl,-rpath,\${libdir}"
> fi
> ...
> -->> In configure file (of source distribution):
> Lines around 33170+ already have the replacement done?
>
> # Set runtime shared library paths as needed
>
> if test "x$enable_rpath" = "xyes"; then
> if test $ARCH = bsdi -o $ARCH = freebsd -o $ARCH = irix -o $ARCH =
> linux -o $ARCH = netbsd; then
> SDL_RLD_FLAGS="-Wl,-rpath,\${libdir}"
> fi
> if test $ARCH = solaris; then
> ...
>
> I am stumped by why the compiled binaries do not work. This is the
> limit of my expertise. Can I find pre-patched SDL-1.2.11 source
> somewhere?
>
>
> Regards,
> -ishwar
>
>