-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[core] Platforms split into separate modules: PLATFORM_DRM
status
#3344
Comments
I feel like I must be missing something obvious. I can compile PLATFORM_DRM on my fork without issue but I can't compile any examples without hitting this:
@raysan5 @ubkp any ideas? It seems to be specifically happening with rcore_drm.c and I can't figure out why. If I compile raylib for PLATFORM_DESKTOP and compile the examples I have no issues. But repeating the steps for PLATFORM_DRM results in this and I can't see any issue. |
@michaelfiber Perhaps it could be here: L227-L229. Could you try this:
|
@ubkp - Thanks for the suggestion, that didn't do it but I think I'm on the right path now. A bunch of code that should be defined in rcore_drm.c was accidentally still left in rcore.c. I'm going to move them first and see if that has an effect. These are functions that are only called by code in rcore_drm.c so moving them should be of little impact to other submodules. Also the makefile does not include as many warning flags for PLATFORM_DRM as it does for others so I added the missing one for PLATFORM_DRM and it revealed some useful info. |
PLATFORM_DRM
status
Got everything cleaned up, found the 1 letter typo that was causing my issues, and am now doing a final rundown of checking examples to make sure they compile and work. Updated the first post here to have a nice table like @ubkp did. And the code changes are in draft form over in #3347 |
EnvironmentTested |
@ubkp Thanks so much for doing so much testing! I haven't gotten a chance to yet but I'm glad its working. I marked it ready to merge for now. I was looking over And I think a decent chunk of the DRM specific stuff will eventually change as I think the input system can be streamlined and simplified a bit now. Having it split out would be great for that effort. Is there a pitfall I am missing to having that data split out? I know there was a concern about multiple windows but I'm not sure exactly how |
@michaelfiber No problem, glad I could help! 👍 I think one advantage of Just would like to suggest that if |
@michaelfiber @ubkp Thank you very much for all the work you put on this BIG redesign! Glad to know that most examples are already working as expected! Also, many thanks for all the testing and the detailed reports.
@michaelfiber I think it's a good idea to move
I agree that moving those big structures, like the DRM one, can be done in a separate batch of after merging. Also, after the merge, it can be reviewed to simplify/standarize possible variables to use the |
With the DRM PR merged I think this can be closed. Thanks! |
Following @ubkp I'm starting this to track the PLATFORM_DRM split status
Modules checked status
Functions checked status
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: