[Originally reported by Peter Breitenlohner in attachment #2324 [details] [review] to bug #2901.
I've split it out into a separate bug here so the maintainers of the ATI
code in Xorg & DRI can decide which syntax to agree on and who to change.]
The ATI register defines in the DRI & Xorg headers don't agree on whether or
not to use spaces for a number of registers, and this makes gcc cry.
For example, in extras/Mesa/src/mesa/drivers/dri/r200/r200_reg.h:
#define R200_TXC_ARG_B_ZERO (0<<5)
#define R200_TXC_ARG_B_CURRENT_COLOR (2<<5)
#define R200_TXC_ARG_B_CURRENT_ALPHA (3<<5)
#define R200_TXC_ARG_B_DIFFUSE_COLOR (4<<5)
While in programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/ati/radeon_reg.h:
# define R200_TXC_ARG_B_ZERO (0 << 5)
# define R200_TXC_ARG_B_CURRENT_COLOR (2 << 5)
# define R200_TXC_ARG_B_CURRENT_ALPHA (3 << 5)
# define R200_TXC_ARG_B_DIFFUSE_COLOR (4 << 5)
Peter Breitenlohner counted 462 pairs of warnings from disagreements like this
in a build of Xorg 6.8.2. Clearing those out to make the real problems more
visible would be good.
Please sync extras/Mesa/src/mesa/drivers/dri/r200/r200_reg.h to
Is this still an issue? I don't think xf86-video-ati includes headers from Mesa drivers or vice versa...
Yes, this can certainly be closed.