Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:27:32 +0000 From: Tom Evans <tevans.uk@googlemail.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@telenix.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Julian Stecklina <js@alien8.de> Subject: Re: tomcat & mouse problems Message-ID: <1235640452.2224.65.camel@strangepork.mintel.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <49A5F448.7060409@telenix.org> References: <49A19C22.8000600@telenix.org> <20090223083114.F86550@ury.york.ac.uk> <49A5ABB4.2090601@telenix.org> <877i3efb1g.fsf@tabernacle.lan> <49A5F448.7060409@telenix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 20:45 -0500, Chuck Robey wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Julian Stecklina wrote: > > Chuck Robey <chuckr@telenix.org> writes: > > > >> Tell me, I haven't followed much of the history about Xfree86 the last few years > >> (far more concerned with serious health problems), do you know why there aren't > >> any Xfree86 ports in our ports anymore? I checked, they ARE releasing new > >> software, it works, it actually builds far, far faster/easier, howcome our ports > >> are ignoring Xfree86 in favor of Xorg? Not being fascetious here, I really > >> don't know. I'm thinking I would like to experiment to see if the Xfree86 stuff > >> works for my mouse better, but I would really rather use our ports, than getting > >> a release directly from XFree86 (I don't think they even have FreeBSD binaries > >> anymore). > > > > I guess since the license fight that caused the fork most consider > > XFree86 obsolete. It is said that most development takes place in X.org > > at the moment. > > > > Regards, > > That can't possibly be the *entire* reason for the disappearance of all of the > XFree86 ports, is it? Even the device ports (the ones with Xfree86 still in the > naming of the ports) has no Xfree86 code in it anymore. I would be astonished > if that were really true ... because I downloaded the code from there about 3 > months back, and was astonished that it built without one single glitch, needing > only one change (to make it go to the directory I wanted it to). Not one > problem in building, a classic "trivial" build, it seemed to work fine also, and > it built SO much faster and simpler. It can't just have been erased due to > someone's prejudice, could it? No, the were lots of other serious issues that annoyed 90% of the XFree86 developers, see [1], [2]. The license issue was just the straw that broke the camel's back. The ports named 'xf86-*' have nothing to do with XFree86; they are solely xorg drivers. > > Damn, that would be disappointing, if it were true. Luckily, it's builds so > trivially, it doesn['t even need a port, really. As long as it hasn't changed > greatly from 90 days ago ... > > However, the reason I got onto this was because of my mouse's jerkiness, and > since I changed the my scheduler from SCHED_ULE to SCHED_4BSD, that part's > improved also, so I have no longer got any huge reason to push this anymore. > Things are now working so well, I think I'll disappear now ... That's fair enough, but literally no-one uses XFree86 any more. At all. So if you have weird interaction with your mouse on FreeBSD in XFree86, virtually no people will have a comparable system, or knowledge of issues.. Cheers Tom [1] http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2003-March/001997.html [2] http://www.xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2003-March/002165.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1235640452.2224.65.camel>