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

Re: using freedesktop.org libs

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:14:30AM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 00:39, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 09:44:20PM +0000, Anthraxz __ wrote:
> > > The freebsd developpers are making some changes to the XFree86 ports to 
> > > reduce the pain associated with upgrading and maintaining XFree86.
> > > 
> > > http://www.freebsdforums.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16052
> > 
> > Debian doesn't share freebsd's bug of building everything on the
> > target system, so this doesn't really apply.
> That's not the only point, there's also 'I also expect the
> freedesktop.org libraries to stay better maintained and release more
> frequently than XFree86's', e.g.

I, personally, am all for using the fd.o libs, instead of xfree86. It
might be worth noting that fd.o/xlibs upstream is Jim Gettys. He has a
clue or twelve.

The main pain is in breaking it out, confwise, and then packaging-wise.
OTOH, it could make the xlibs transition that much easier, if we're not
doing it in the framework of a massive, massive package anyway.

> > > I found this idea very interesting. I think that the debian project should 
> > > take more advantage of the freedesktop.org libs.
> > 
> > Glancing briefly at the packages in sid, we've been using the ones
> > they have released for a while. Unreleased libraries do not belong in
> > unstable.
> It's not about released vs. unreleased but XFree86 vs. freedesktop.org.

And about how responsive/cluey the upstreams are, specifically.

Daniel, dreaming of source package Xu-ification (no really; it would be
a good thing).

Daniel Stone                                              <daniel@fooishbar.org>
"The programs are documented fully by _The Rise and Fall of a Fooish Bar_,
available by the Info system." -- debian/manpage.sgml.ex, dh_make template

Attachment: pgproFG2L6Yok.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: