[overflowed]

Hi,

i configured with --enable-avahi and zeroconf did not appeared in the gui.
First i checked the config.h

Code:

/* Define to 1 if you have the `avahi-client' library (-lavahi-client). */
#define HAVE_LIBAVAHI_CLIENT 1

/* Define to 1 if you have the `avahi-common' library (-lavahi-common). */
#define HAVE_LIBAVAHI_COMMON 1

seemed to be okay, so i replaced i inserted a "check" in the system.h

Code:

#if defined(HAVE_LIBAVAHI_COMMON) && defined(HAVE_LIBAVAHI_CLIENT)
#define HAS_ZEROCONF
#define HAS_AVAHI
#endif
#ifndef HAS_ZEROCONF
no_ZEROCONF;
#endif

Compilation went well, so i assumed HAS_ZEROCONF is defined.
Next "check" i implemented in the Application.cpp

Code:

#ifdef HAS_ZEROCONF
  //entry in guisetting only present if HAS_ZEROCONF is set
  if(g_guiSettings.GetBool("services.zeroconf"))
  {
    CLog::Log(LOGNOTICE, "starting zeroconf publishing");
    CZeroconf::GetInstance()->Start();
  }
#endif
#ifndef HAS_ZEROCONF
  no_zeroconf_in_app;
#endif

Here the compiler complains, so HAS_ZEROCONF is not defined.
Anybody an idea how this could be possible?

[overflowed]

ohh wtf found it, very strange:

Code:

// ARM does not support certain features... disable them here!
#ifdef _ARMEL
#undef HAS_AVAHI
#undef HAS_ZEROCONF
#undef HAS_VISUALISATION
#undef HAS_FILESYSTEM_HTSP
#endif

why should ARM not support HAS_AVAHI and HAS_ZEROCONF?

Is commiting a patch useless? Is there a reason for disabling it?

[davilla]

ohh wtf found it, very strange:

Code:

// ARM does not support certain features... disable them here!
#ifdef _ARMEL
#undef HAS_AVAHI
#undef HAS_ZEROCONF
#undef HAS_VISUALISATION
#undef HAS_FILESYSTEM_HTSP
#endif

why should ARM not support HAS_AVAHI and HAS_ZEROCONF?

Is commiting a patch useless? Is there a reason for disabling it?

We are busy elsewhere with arm, the 1st thing we do is disable things we don't absolutely need.