From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 20 19:23:39 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C83E16A468 for ; Sun, 20 May 2007 19:23:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1686E13C502 for ; Sun, 20 May 2007 19:23:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (acrux [128.131.111.60]) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id E41F813787; Sun, 20 May 2007 21:23:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix, from userid 1203) id 735461A7CD; Sun, 20 May 2007 21:23:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63CC11A7C7; Sun, 20 May 2007 21:23:43 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 21:23:43 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Florent Thoumie , Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20070520183403.GD41378@xor.obsecurity.org> Message-ID: References: <20070520183403.GD41378@xor.obsecurity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: X.org update broke emulators/wine with old version of X X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 19:23:39 -0000 On Sun, 20 May 2007, Florent Thoumie wrote: >> Can someone more familiar with this lend a helping hand, please? I >> assume we do want to support users still running older versions of X, >> don't we? > Not really. This is why XFree86-4 will go away in a few months. > > In that case, it's not about the version of X. The breakage is caused > by the PREFIX merge. Given that we do not have an update solution which nicely works for some non-trivial setups and situations I'm afraid this is going to hurt us. I'll keep testing and reporting bugs and see where this is heading. On Sun, 20 May 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Per my email to ports the other week, XFree86-4 requires a maintainer > interested in keeping support alive. In particular since we now have > no supported build architectures that are using XFree86-4 by default, > it will be (and has been) entirely untested with the post-X.org > changes and will quickly rot. Please note that my report was for a system running X.org 6.9, not XFree86. Gerald