[libical] Adding support for VALARM extensions

[Ken Murchison]

On 03/31/2014 09:02 PM, Robert Norris wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014, at 11:49 AM, Ken Murchison wrote:
>> I sorted and rearranged a few things, but the enum values should be the
>> same.  If not, please let me know.
> Attached is the differences in installed headers between a shipping
> libical 1.0 (from Debian) and the SVN repo + your patch.
>
> icalvalue_kind is different. The new output is sorted, so the values
> don't match anymore.

Yes.  My bad.  I was comparing my values to what the current SVN code 
outputs, not realizing that it had changed since the 1.0 release.  
Attached is a corrected version of my patch.


>
> I see there's a couple of *_LAST_ENUM defines, that are used inside
> libical itself. They look right now, but will that be a problem when
> they change?
>

I don't believe so.  I looked at this myself a few days ago, and the 
*_LAST_ENUM values are used for searching for a particular enum in the 
mapping.  So we want/need *LAST_ENUM to grow as we add more stuff.  If 
an application is relying on *_LAST_ENUM to remain constant, then they 
are screwed.  In fact, I'm wondering if we even want/need those values 
exposed.

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Principal Systems Software Engineer
Carnegie Mellon University

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: abi-fix.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 25364 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/libical-interest/attachments/20140401/cdb9dfed/attachment.bin>