On Fri, 2018-05-18 at 09:49 +0300, Igor Filatov wrote:
> > From the user's perspective, users shouldn't have to build their
> own
> > system libraries. From the developers point-of-view, the rules are
> > actually readable, understandable, and it takes as long to build
> > libfprint and the docs as
> From the user's perspective, users shouldn't have to build their own
> system libraries. From the developers point-of-view, the rules are
> actually readable, understandable, and it takes as long to build
> libfprint and the docs as it did just running configure. So I'm fine
> with the drawbacks
On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 23:40 +0300, Igor Filatov wrote:
> Mine seems ok. The docs could use a short build&install guide though.
> I've updated the readme in my
> repo https://github.com/iafilatov/libfprint. Meson is great but from
> a user's perspective it doesn't beat `./configure && make`.
From t
Mine seems ok. The docs could use a short build&install guide though. I've
updated the readme in my repo https://github.com/iafilatov/libfprint. Meson
is great but from a user's perspective it doesn't beat `./configure &&
make`. And actually there's quite a few ones who want to try it out but
don't
Hello all,
libfprint has been ported to Meson[1] (from autotools) and gtk-doc
(from Doxygen) in git. This means that building libfprint is now much
much faster, and the API documentation is now clearer.
It would be great if driver authors could update their development
branches and report any pro
