Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 11:02:57 -0500 From: Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> To: James Mansion <james@mansionfamily.plus.com> Cc: freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Whither X? Message-ID: <1242489777.5638.53.camel@balrog.2hip.net> In-Reply-To: <4A0EA410.5020909@mansionfamily.plus.com> References: <20090515232350.GH57001@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <1242433708.5638.26.camel@balrog.2hip.net> <4A0EA410.5020909@mansionfamily.plus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-6M8CuPpWivQpO6JCAd20 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 12:31 +0100, James Mansion wrote: > Robert Noland wrote: > > Xorg in general, while some are porting issues. Since I don't see > > patches attached, I have to assume that you are ok with that. On the > > =20 > I thought in general people had grown out of 'send me the patches' but=20 > clearly not. Is it > not OK to be just a user, and to complain when the system regresses? Yes, it is fine to be just a user and I try to address any issues brought to my attention. I am just overloaded and at the very least need good debugging info. In general, I just need other folks to take an interest in helping with X and all the bits and pieces that go along with it. Whether that is trying to help with documentation or porting or just trying to help answer other users questions when you can. > > Some of the POLA issues that you raise have been discussed on Xorg list= s > > and have valid reasons for the changes, for at least some value of > > valid. The change to libpciaccess is what broke multi-card setups, but > > would you argue that the xserver should be doing os specific frobbing o= f > > the pci bus? While this particular issue is being worked on again > > lately, the overall number of users that it effects is relatively small= . > > > > =20 > From the point of view of a dispassionate observer, it does seem that=20 > X.org has moved slowly > but significantly from an attempt to keep all its user communities happy=20 > to focussing greatly > on Linux and caring little if *BSD and *Solaris lack the resources to=20 > keep up trying to emulate > design decisions that are Linux-centric, then that's just tough. Or so=20 > it seems. Well, Intel is trying to drive a lot of development and are only focused on linux. While they aren't actively trying impede our progress, they aren't really concerned with providing us much help. Other driver developers are more kind in general, AMD has been really good to work with both from the aspect of providing me with hardware and trying to produce code that doesn't require massive changes to work on FreeBSD or linux. The Nouveau developers are also quite happy to work with us. Almost all development is done on linux though. > I don't think anyone can blame you for being a bit defensive Robert. =20 > The problem is > with X.org. Upstream need to be honest with everyone about how much=20 > they care about > some of their users. > Maybe we will all come to regret that no-one seemed interested in taking=20 > the old Scitech > SNAP product further when they gave up on it. >=20 > (http://www.scitechsoft.com/news/press/sale_of_snap.html) >=20 >=20 > Perhaps the answer is to step back and consider whether something akin=20 > to the emulation > that allows Windows NDIS drivers to run could be fashioned to allow=20 > Windows graphics > drivers to run - perhaps using recent virtualisation advances to limit=20 > the damage they can > do. While politically painful on some levels, it does provide for a=20 > functional binary > compatibility abstraction. Pretty soon most of us will have desktop=20 > devices that handle the > new x86 virtualization features and it becomes increasingly pointless to=20 > hang onto old > X terms when you can get hardware like an Aspire Revo for peanuts. I really don't think that is is at all feasible... At least not if you expect any sort of performance. > I've not looked at building X recently, but if the new build system is=20 > so bad, then why > not replace it? waf seems handy to me. Its a lot faster than scons,=20 > handy to script in > Python, and can handle configuration tasks etc. Well, I really don't have a big problem with the build system. Sure maybe it could be more efficient or faster, but even I don't build everything that often and building X is pretty fast, when compared to building gnome or kde. robert. > James >=20 --=20 Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org> FreeBSD --=-6M8CuPpWivQpO6JCAd20 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAkoO47EACgkQM4TrQ4qfROPq0QCfaLE0pUNTRBMUKrYDZB3QEjW2 JgAAnjzyteQ77FKe6Db91bONuUxJ6jHd =Tenw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-6M8CuPpWivQpO6JCAd20--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1242489777.5638.53.camel>