9 ms·
Maybe.... Probably. Especially if I had left a detailed comment explaining why. But I still would have required an interim solution for everyone building from
by phire 2y ago
Maybe.... Probably. Especially if I had left a detailed comment explaining why.
But I still would have required an interim solution for everyone building from source until these patched/fixed versions of SDL started shipping in distros. And then how would the warning message tell the difference between the original SDL 2.0.3 and a patched version of SDL 2.0.3?
And we are talking about dozens of distros, multiple chances for something to go wrong.
My point is that I quickly came to the conclusion that ripping out SDL and reimplementing the functionality was the simplest, most conclusive solution.
- oneshtein 2y ago> But I still would have required an interim solution for everyone building from source until these patched/fixed versions of SDL started shipping in distros. $ rpm -q SDL2 SDL2-2.30.9-1.fc40.x86_64 SDL2-2.30.9-1.fc40.i686 :-/