[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: building xfree86 4 for debian/arm

Branden Robinson wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 06:09:51PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> # remove the upstream symlink X -> XFree86
>> This symlink does not exist because the XFree86 server binary was not built
>> in the first place and therefore no symlink was created.
>That's bad.

>> [Would I be better off asking this question of the debian-arm list?]
>The actual porting will probably have to be done by someone familiar with
>the ARM, but something could likely be cooked up fairly quickly, based on
>the ARM patches for XFree86 3.x.

[I've added debian-arm to the CC list]

I tried putting together some patches based on a combination of the
3.x ARM patches and the 4.0 patches for other non-x86 architectures;
it's now falling over with a compile error in elfloader.c. It looks
like the dynamic loader has no ARM support at all, and I don't think
I can get away with just adding "|| defined(__arm__)" to cpp conditionals
for this one :->

I've temporarily put my patches-so-far at:
if anybody else is interested.
(NB that in particular the list of 'which drivers to build' in xfree86.cf
is totally guesswork...)

[Incidentally, I think the way that non-Intel Linux architectures are
dealt with in the X sources is pretty vile; there's lots of places 
that go :
 #if defined(__powerpc__) || defined(__mc68000__) || defined(__alpha__) || ...
 /* stuff for not-x86 */
 /* stuff for x86 */
which is just completely backwards. And it would be much cleaner in
elfloader.c to say "#ifdef cpu_is_64_bit" rather than
"#if defined (__alpha__) || defined (__ia64__) || (defined (__sparc && (...)"

Peter Maydell

Reply to: