Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
  • Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:45:19 -0400

That's why I am integrating this into /test/ grimoire. The built-in drivers appear to work.
I'm hoping to get feedback on binary drivers this way.
I'm ready to create an option if one is needed, but not before I find out about this need. Two things are the reson:
1. the X's loader was mimicking the libc's one anyway;
2. Xorg wants to move to a much more modular structure, so the pressure to use standard loader is only going to increase.

Sergey.

Eric Sandall wrote:

Quoting "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT sourcemage.org>:

Let's thank x.org guys. They frequently have to choose between
documentation and working code, so it's good they choose the code :-).
Eric and Flavien, thanks for the feedback! I'll be pulling xorg into test.


Erm, don't we want it optional, and default off (except for x86_64 maybe,
except
David Brown got xorg compiling fine on his)? This is still marked as "not
finished" on X.org's site. I really like the idea of it, but am leary about
forcing all of our users to use it without much more testing.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page