I’m getting ready to release SDL 1.2.10:
http://www.libsdl.org/svn.php
Please check it out and report any bugs to:
http://bugzilla.libsdl.org/
(ignore the certificate warning)
Also, if any of the bugs already on the list are showstoppers, please
let me know ASAP.
Thanks!
-Sam Lantinga, Senior Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment
How does this relate to the release of the various SDL_* modules? For
example, does this mean a new version of SDL_image will be released, or
is that completely independent? Judging by the version numbers, I’d
guess they are independent, but I’m not sure. I’d love to ‘RTFM’ on how
this works, if I could find the ‘M’ that had the info.
Basically, my question really boils down to: “When will a new version of
SDL_image be released?”. I do have a current project that still has to
use a CVS version of SDL_image to work properly, and would love it if I
could just point users to, say, SDL_image-1.2.5?On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:15:49PM -0700, Sam Lantinga wrote:
I’m getting ready to release SDL 1.2.10:
–
Steaphan Greene
GPG public key: http://www.cs.binghamton.edu/~sgreene/gpg.key.txt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20060429/f234e053/attachment.pgp
They’re unrelated, but I tend to release new versions all at the same
time since a lot of time is spent logging into various platforms and
updating build environments, compared to the amount of work actually
building the packages.
I definitely plan to release new versions of the SDL_* libraries I
maintain.
See ya!
-Sam Lantinga, Senior Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 04:15:49PM -0700, Sam Lantinga wrote:
I’m getting ready to release SDL 1.2.10:
How does this relate to the release of the various SDL_* modules? For
example, does this mean a new version of SDL_image will be released, or
is that completely independent? Judging by the version numbers, I’d
guess they are independent, but I’m not sure. I’d love to ‘RTFM’ on how
this works, if I could find the ‘M’ that had the info.
Basically, my question really boils down to: “When will a new version of
SDL_image be released?”. I do have a current project that still has to
use a CVS version of SDL_image to work properly, and would love it if I
could just point users to, say, SDL_image-1.2.5?
Here’s a new SDL 1.2.10 pre-release snapshot:
http://www.libsdl.org/svn.php
http://www.libsdl.org/tmp/SDL-1.2.10.tar.gz
http://www.libsdl.org/tmp/SDL_image-1.2.5.tar.gz
http://www.libsdl.org/tmp/SDL_mixer-1.2.7.tar.gz
http://www.libsdl.org/tmp/SDL_net-1.2.6.tar.gz
http://www.libsdl.org/tmp/SDL_ttf-2.0.8.tar.gz
All of the release blocking bugs in bugzilla have been resolved, and it
needs lots of testing. Please report any bugs, and peruse the list to
make sure nothing critical was missed.
http://bugzilla.libsdl.org/
If all goes well, I’ll start making release packages on Sunday! 
-Sam Lantinga, Senior Software Engineer, Blizzard EntertainmentAll of the release blocking bugs in bugzilla have been resolved, and it
needs lots of testing. Please report any bugs, and peruse the list to
make sure nothing critical was missed.
Found the following on Solaris 10:
gcc -g -O2 -I./include -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -I/usr/local/include
-I/pkg/esound/0.2.36/include -I/pkg/audiofile/0.2.6/include
-I/usr/openwin/include -DXTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -c
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11dyn.c -fPIC -DPIC -o build/.libs/SDL_x11dyn.o
In file included from ./src/video/x11/SDL_x11dyn.c:96:
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was here
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was here
Commenting out the offending line make it compile at least, but the proper
fix is propobly something along the lines of
https://bugzilla.libsdl.org/show_bug.cgi?id=138
Need to configure with --disable-dga.
Building executables fail with missing libiconv symbols.
None is added to bugzilla yet…
All of the release blocking bugs in bugzilla have been resolved, and it
needs lots of testing. Please report any bugs, and peruse the list to
make sure nothing critical was missed.Found the following on Solaris 10:
Ooops, make that Solaris 9 
gcc -g -O2 -I./include -D_GNU_SOURCE=1 -I/usr/local/include
-I/pkg/esound/0.2.36/include -I/pkg/audiofile/0.2.6/include
-I/usr/openwin/include -DXTHREADS -D_REENTRANT -c
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11dyn.c -fPIC -DPIC -o build/.libs/SDL_x11dyn.o
In file included from ./src/video/x11/SDL_x11dyn.c:96:
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was here
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was here
XSynchronize is only used #ifdef X11_DEBUG so it should be the same in
SDL_x11sym.h
Building executables fail with missing libiconv symbols.
Adding LDFLAGS="-L/usr/local/lib -R/usr/local/lib -liconv" to configure
fixes this one. The cause is most likely a local problem, where GNU
libiconv is installed on top of Solaris-provided iconv…On Thu, 11 May 2006, Mattias Karlsson wrote:
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was here
What’s the prototype for XSynchronize in /usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h?
Is this on Sparc?
Thanks,
-Sam Lantinga, Senior Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment
./src/video/x11/SDL_x11sym.h:127: error: conflicting types for
’XSynchronize’
/usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h:1530: error: previous declaration of
’XSynchronize’ was hereWhat’s the prototype for XSynchronize in /usr/openwin/include/X11/Xlib.h?
extern int (XSynchronize(
#if NeedFunctionPrototypes
Display /* display /,
Bool / onoff */
))(void);
#else
))();
#endif
So, like PR 138 this may be due to X headers being included in the "wrong"
order.
Is this on Sparc?
Yup. On a SUN Fire V440 to be exact.On Thu, 11 May 2006, Sam Lantinga wrote: