[sdl2-image] Features must use sdl2[x11] on Linux#23725
[sdl2-image] Features must use sdl2[x11] on Linux#23725strega-nil-ms merged 42 commits intomicrosoft:masterfrom
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
|
Note: Need to test all features |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
|
All features are tested successfully in the following triplet:
|
|
I realize that this port uses a custom build CMake system. So some problems are native to vcpkg. Maybe it needs a more general review towards best practice for CMake, instead of local modifications. Upstream has a CMake build system now in the main branch but I don't know if it is feasible to backport that one. |
|
I think I tried to fix the wrong thing. The DLL thing was never a problem. The problem is that sdl2-image incorrectly consumes sdl2 because on Linux the feature x11 is needed. I'll fix that in the evening (UTC). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2pp/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
|
I've tested it. Now I can successfully load both image types. |
|
@JackBoosY Can you please review this PR? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You have modified or added at least one vcpkg.json where a "license" field is missing.
Details
If you feel able to do so, please consider adding a "license" field to the following files:
ports/sdl2-image/vcpkg.jsonports/sdl2/vcpkg.json
Valid values for the license field can be found in the documentation
|
LGTM, thanks! |
Describe the pull request
What does your PR fix?
Fixes [sdl2-image] JPEG and WEBP features do not work on Linux #21331
Which triplets are supported/not supported? Have you updated the CI baseline?
unchanged
Does your PR follow the maintainer guide?
Yes
If you have added/updated a port: Have you run
./vcpkg x-add-version --alland committed the result?Yes
If you are still working on the PR, open it as a Draft: https://github.blog/2019-02-14-introducing-draft-pull-requests/