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

Re: Switching g-i from DirectFB to X11 -- specific issues/comments

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 07:47:29 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:

> In this mail some more specific issues I noticed while testing/reviewing.
> I'm saving the switch to console-setup for a last separate reply.
> On Monday 08 February 2010, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> >   libx11
> Is /usr/share/X11/locale needed? If it is, could some of its contents be 
> excluded because they are not relevant for G-I?

I don't think it can be removed completely, but as I said in another
reply it can most likely be stripped down.  gtk doesn't use the X input
method by default, which means that the compose tables go unused, e.g.

Not sure how to do the stripping down in a maintainable way yet, but
that can probably be figured out. :)


> >   udev                   (maybe a single udeb could be sufficient)
> I suppose the additions really are unavoidable?
Pretty much.

> The problem with the current patch is that udev-udeb depends on the new 
> libudev-udeb and will thus also get pulled into regular installer images 
> and increase their size.
> So I'd prefer to concentrate all bits that are only needed for G-I to be 
> combined in a separate udeb (udev-gtk-udeb?) and leave the existing 
> udev-udeb unchanged. udev-gtk-udeb should then depend on udev-udeb and one 
> of the xorg udebs should depend on udev-gtk-udeb.
> Hopefully that's acceptable for Marco.
Fair enough.  (The udev bit depending on libudev is /lib/udev/input_id,
which basically tells X what the input devices are.)

> Point of attention is whether we want the persistent input rules to get 
> copied to the installed system (as we already do for persistent net 
> rules).
The persistent-input rules are static, there's no runtime addition of
new rules, so that shouldn't be necessary.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: