Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 06:53:11 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Robert Noland <rnoland@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Unhappy Xorg upgrade Message-ID: <20090130195311.GK1755@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <1233236412.1779.40.camel@wombat.2hip.net> References: <6B7ABE80-35AB-4C44-B5A4-200E10DCC3AC@airwired.net> <E1LSP0B-0003Ds-H8@daland.home> <49819BD5.5040709@FreeBSD.org> <E1LSWHr-0009TS-P7@daland.home> <1233236412.1779.40.camel@wombat.2hip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--+1TulI7fc0PCHNy3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As a general note, this is the second time in a row that an X.org upgrade broke X for a significant number of people. IMO, this suggests that our approach to X.org upgrades needs significant changes (see below). X11 is a critical component for anyone who is using FreeBSD as a desktop and having upgrades fail or come with significant POLA violations and regressions for significant numbers of people is not acceptable. On 2009-Jan-29 08:40:11 -0500, Robert Noland <rnoland@freebsd.org> wrote: >I've had patches available for probably a couple of months now posted to >freebsd-x11@. For the few people who tested it, I had no real issues >reported. I didn't recall seeing any reference to patches so I went looking. All I could find is a couple of references to a patchset existing buried inside threads discussing specific problems with X. The majority of people who didn't have those specific problems probably skipped the thread and never saw that a patchset was available. When the X.org 7.0 upgrade was planned, a heads-up went out on a number of mailing lists, together with a pointer to the patchset and upgrade instructions and the upgrade did not proceed until both a reasonable number of people reported success and reported problems had been ironed out. Given the ongoing problems with code provided by X.org, I suggest that this approach needs to be followed for every future release of X.org until (if) the X.org Project demonstrates that they can provide release-quality code. > This update also brings in support for a >lot of people who are running newer hardware. And breaks support for lots of people who used to have functional X servers. --=20 Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour. --+1TulI7fc0PCHNy3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkmDWqcACgkQ/opHv/APuIdisQCgogeNZ8aXPDJ3gcZ/23Gyp/CV bmsAn0efyI9cS6TWGFkofoYh6oFmtc5l =i2p0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+1TulI7fc0PCHNy3--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090130195311.GK1755>