Re: pkg/43811 (pkgsrc-2010Q2 - emulators/vice build (wrong patch))

[Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost>]

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 00:50:04 +0000 (UTC)
Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost> wrote:

> The following reply was made to PR pkg/43811; it has been noted by GNATS.
> 
> From: Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost>
> To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
> Cc: 
> Subject: Re: pkg/43811 (pkgsrc-2010Q2 - emulators/vice build (wrong patch))
> Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 20:47:49 -0400
> 
>  On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:40:04 +0000 (UTC)
>  Matthew Mondor <mm_lists%pulsar-zone.net@localhost> wrote:
>  
>  >  The manual page for XShm(3) makes no mention of shmproto.h, only of
>  >  sys/shm.h and X11/extensions/XShm.h, which might suggest that including
>  >  shmproto.h was to cope with a bug on a specific X11 system which
>  >  doesn't automatically include it via its XShm.h.  Unless XShm.h is now
>  >  deprecated and shmproto.h is the new official include on newer X11?
>  
>  I sent a post to tech-x11 for advice.

So after no reply whatsoever :)  I did a few searches and noticed that
when FreeBSD upgraded XOrg they fixed this which they considered a bug,
by making XShm.h include implicitely shmproto.h.  I also saw a bunch of
related complaints and broken package reports that happened on various
OS when XOrg was updated to 7.5, so this is a known issue.

Would it make sense to go the same route FreeBSD went for -current
base-X11, on which including XShm.h (which seems the standard include
to use the MIT-SHM extension) is no longer enough, when this works on
NetBSD-5 and older?

Thanks,
-- 
Matt