From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43979) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfYW-0000bG-FW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:02:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfYS-0004VI-9p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:02:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46802) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZlfYS-0004Um-5n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:02:28 -0400 References: <1444647299-28642-1-git-send-email-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <20151012112608.GJ21855@redhat.com> <20151012123135.GL21855@redhat.com> From: John Snow Message-ID: <561BD992.1080702@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:02:26 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/3] Use glib 2.26 version macros List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell , "Daniel P. Berrange" Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Marc-Andr=c3=a9_Lureau?= , QEMU , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" On 10/12/2015 08:38 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 12 October 2015 at 13:31, Daniel P. Berrange w= rote: >> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 02:24:36PM +0200, Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau wrote= : >>> What about just using the macro, but not bumping glib requirement? >> >> It would be desirable - I think someone explored using the GLIB_VERSI= ON >> macros before, without bumping version. I can't remember what the prob= lem >> was that made them abandon that though - maybe someone else recalls... >=20 > I think that was David Gilbert, and I vaguely recall there being > bad interactions with our glib-compat.h header. >=20 > -- PMM >=20 The version check macros will complain about our back-porting of glib functions as seen in glib-compat, yes. I think David Gilbert and I each had a stab at it. It's fine if you're running 2.22 or so, but if you are running a more modern version that actually provides the functions we backport/emulate, the version check macros will catch that and set an error. Not sure if there's some sort of squelch mechanism. "I know I told you to complain if I use a 2.23+ function, but forgive me just this once." --js