Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:38:02 -0800 From: Eric Anholt <eta@lclark.edu> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11 Makefile ports/x11/libXpm Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist Message-ID: <1075153082.1646.2.camel@leguin> In-Reply-To: <20040126114327.3621078f@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <200401251014.i0PAE8G2004435@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040125125547.56311882@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <1075059166.703.37.camel@leguin> <20040126114327.3621078f@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2004-01-26 at 02:43, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:32:46 -0800 > Eric Anholt <anholt@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > Yes, I really intend to replace XFree86's libraries with freedesktop.org > > libraries where there's an fd.o version available. > > [good reasons why this will happen] > > > This is not a fork of XFree86. Notably, we (as in fd.o) don't have any > > fork of the XFree86 X Server*. This is just the libraries. There is an > > X Server at freedesktop.org, which shares the internal X Server parts > > but has different DDXs, along with the new extensions (fixes, damage, > > and composite). I've been working off and on on porting that server, > > but I don't think I'll be able to finish it before I leave. Xouvert is > > a dead project (if you can say it was ever alive to begin with) that no > > established X hackers worked on. > > > > * This actually may change. There's been talk, and one person hacking > > on, importing the XFree86 DDX into the X Server tree and fixing it to > > work with Composite. I have serious doubts myself about the viability > > of trying to do minor fixes to XAA instead of axing it and starting from > > scratch, given its major limitations in the presence of Composite and > > increased use of Render, which is why I've been spending so much time on > > the kdrive server. > > So you (fd.o) take the libs from XFree86 and just repack them with the > autotools? By reading fd.o (http://pdx.freedesktop.org/Software/X11) it > seems you want to improve them independently from XFree86. I don't think > this is bad, but IMHO it's a fork then. Yes, this is a fork of the libs, and improvements are being made on some of them (libX11 in particular with XCB). And actually, in the cases of several of them it's returning maintainership of the libs to the authors of those libs. When I said it's not a fork of XFree86 I meant that it is not a fork of the server, which is the important thing that XFree86 produces. -- Eric Anholt eta@lclark.edu http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1075153082.1646.2.camel>