Re: [Tuxpaint-devel] [Fwd: Bug#300632: tuxpaint: FTBFS: Changed header files.]

[Ben A. <sy...@sa...>]

On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 13:32 -0800, Bill Kendrick wrote:
> As mentioned, we have stuff like this, now:
> 
>   #if !defined(_SDL_TTF_H) && !defined(_SDLttf_h)
> 
> which seems to cover the schizophrenia that the SDL header files have been
> going through as they mature. ;^)
> 
> Does THAT not work?

No.  It's a case of bit-rot.  The Tuxpaint in Debian doesn't have that.
Someone tried to build it against a recent SDL, and it broke.  I'm sure
the code above works just fine.  I just haven't done a CVS build in a
while.

> 
> <snip>
> > > The proper way to do this would be to have a configure script
> > > that could then give an error message.
> 
> Ack! No! ;^)
> 
> Or, if so, whoever creates it will need to become adopted by my wife and
> I and live in our spare bedroom, so that when stuff stops working, I'm
> not stuck. ;^)

Hah!  OK.  I concede.  I wouldn't want it to come to that.

> Anyway, if it comes to it, I suppose we can just remove the checks.
> I was TRYING to be friendly, but SDL*.h went and broke things out from
> underneath me. ;^)

So they did.  And that is my final word on it, if anyone asks.  "Sorry,
the build system is correct, it's upstream that broke." :)  (Too bad the
bug is closed now, or I'd add that!)

Ben