From Debian libSDL maintainers, any plans for bugfix release?

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

Hi both, and thanks for the quick reply.

Replying to both e-mails in this.

(Possibly relevant note: in Debian we had 2.0.2 instead of 2.0.3,
because at the time the changes were not considered very relevant --
changes for non-Linux OS, if I recall correctly).


2016-01-14 23:08 GMT+00:00 Sam Lantinga <slouken at libsdl.org>:
> Do you know what the incompatible change was? That was unintentional and I
> can make a bugfix release immediately.

It seems that there are *possible* changes in prototype functions:

===================
-extern DECLSPEC int SDLCALL SDL_SetError(const char *fmt, ...);
+extern DECLSPEC int SDLCALL SDL_SetError(SDL_PRINTF_FORMAT_STRING
const char *fmt, ...) SDL_PRINTF_VARARG_FUNC(1);
===================

Another one, change to function and variable names:

===================
-    const struct SDL_assert_data *next;
-} SDL_assert_data;
+    const struct SDL_AssertData *next;
+} SDL_AssertData;


-extern DECLSPEC SDL_assert_state SDLCALL SDL_ReportAssertion(SDL_assert_data *,
+extern DECLSPEC SDL_AssertState SDLCALL SDL_ReportAssertion(SDL_AssertData *,
===================

Changes to structs:

===================
+    Uint32 direction;   /**< Set to one of the SDL_MOUSEWHEEL_*
defines. When FLIPPED the values in X and Y will be opposite. Multiply
by -1 to change them back */
} SDL_MouseWheelEvent;
===================


In general, the concern is that the patch is 125K lines long, so it is
pretty difficult to review and any single line could potentially be
incompatible.

There used to be the website "upstream-tracker" with diagnoses about
this, but it's been removed a while ago, we didn't do any automatic
check yet.

Bear in mind that at least I don't have a great deal of expertise in
the matter, so maybe what I say above will not cause any trouble, but
just stating about concerns that we have when dealing with the
upgrade.


2016-01-14 23:15 GMT+00:00 Ryan C. Gordon <icculus at icculus.org>:
>
> Some structs have grown, but should remain binary compatible with any prior 2.0.x release.

One concern that we/I have with the growth of structs is that for
example if an existing program created an array of SDL_MouseWheelEvent
(or uses "sizeof" for any other reason), and increments a pointer to
access the different elements of the array, can be problematic.


> Is there a specific crash? We need to examine this right away. One should not need to recompile apps to move from 2.0.3 to 2.0.4.

No crashes yet, because we didn't uploaded the packages yet.

(Note what I said above of 2.0.2 vs 2.0.3, if it's relevant).


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>