From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 12 19:55:26 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6042C4A for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mp1-smtp-5.eutelia.it (mp1-smtp-5.eutelia.it [62.94.10.165]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8664B1762 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ns2.biolchim.it (ip-188-188.sn2.eutelia.it [83.211.188.188]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mp1-smtp-5.eutelia.it (Eutelia) with ESMTP id 4B6921714AE for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:55:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from soth.ventu (adsl-ull-180-187.41-151.net24.it [151.41.187.180]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns2.biolchim.it (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s1CJtBJW067682 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:55:15 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) X-Authentication-Warning: ns2.biolchim.it: Host adsl-ull-180-187.41-151.net24.it [151.41.187.180] claimed to be soth.ventu Received: from alamar.ventu (alamar.ventu [10.1.2.18]) by soth.ventu (8.14.8/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s1CJt4lk003596 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:55:04 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ml@netfence.it) Message-ID: <52FBD198.20102@netfence.it> Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:55:04 +0100 From: Andrea Venturoli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD i386; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NEW_XORG and vt(4) in stable branches References: <201402121443.44313.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201402121443.44313.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (ns2.biolchim.it [192.168.2.203]); Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:55:15 +0100 (CET) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.74 X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:55:26 -0000 On 02/12/14 20:43, John Baldwin wrote: > Our current feeling is that we would like to not enable NEW_XORG by default > for the packages for a given src branch until vt(4) has been merged to that > branch. We do not think that vt(4) needs to be enabled by default in the > branch; just having it available as an option as it is in HEAD would be > sufficient. Our understanding is that merging vt(4) in its current-ish form > to stable/10 and stable/9 is quite feasible and not a major nightmare. We do > not feel that it is necessary to merge to stable/8 as drm2 isn't merged to > stable/8 either. (Our assumption is that stable/8 will just stay with the old > Xorg and the ports tree will have to support old Xorg until 8.x support in > ports is EOL'd.) > > Does that sound sensible? To me absolutely; I have a couple of 9/10 boxes I'd think(*) about upgrading as soon as KMS+VT comes out of head. (*) Notice "think": I've still not read all the limitaions, pros and cons, etc. Maybe I'll wait for a couple of success reports from others :) Just my 2c. bye & Thanks av.