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

Re: gnome-randr-applet and Xfree86 4.3.0 ...



On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:53:19PM +0200, Sven Luther scrawled:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 08:41:57PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 12:18:08PM +0200, Sven Luther scrawled:
> > > Why not just upload it to sid (it is already in the NEW queue btw), it
> > > will not be installable for people not using 4.3.0 so it will not break
> > > anything for anyone. How do i make it visible that i have packaged it if
> > > nobody can see it ? Should i make a wnpp ITP bugreport and give the link
> > > to the repository in it ?
> > 
> > Well, it'll break the buildds, and be uninstallable in sid. That makes
> > it either contrib or experimental removal. I suggest ITPing it and
> > linking to your repository for the time being. The ftpmasters won't
> > accept it, I can guarantee that now.
> 
> I can let it sit in the NEW queue though, or should i ask for its
> removal ? What about uploading it to experimental instead or something
> such ?

I really don't know; that's up to you.

> > > That said, i am a bit worried about XFree86 4.3.0 and sarge, 4.2.1 is
> > > not yet ready for sarge, and if a release/freeze for around july is
> > > planned, this let's little time to fully test 4.3.0, which seems to be
> > > already somewhat obsolet by now, if you consider all the flaming in
> > > upstreams xfree86-forum mailing list.
> > 
> > Well, considering it's the best we have to work with right now, that's
> > what we're running with.
> 
> I am not sure i really understood you here, you are saying that 4.2.1 is
> the best we have, and we have to make do with it, right ?

Well, considering 4.3.0 only runs on i386/powerpc/sparc/ia64/alpha at
the moment, and s390/hurd-i386 support is in the works, it still has a
way to go. Getting a complete 4.2.1 is an admirable goal, *just in case*
4.3 doesn't make it to sarge.

> I think the main problem here is that debian has been playing catchup
> since i joined in 1998 at least for X. It would be refreshing that it be
> otherwise, but i guess we just don't have the manpower for it, right. We
> could very well decide to drop 4.2.1 and go with 4.3.0 for unstable,
> even before 4.3.0 was released, and have more of our patches be
> incorporated upstream before the release. Such a thing would be
> especially important if the XFree86 project will go for more frequent
> releases, like the discussion on the future of X on the xforum mailing
> list seems to hint at. I also don't see anyone from the debian X team on
> that list, but maybe i have missed it, the list being rather high volume
> after all.

The problem is that we have by far the best packages of any
distribution, with RedHat our closest competitor in this regard. They're
of an amazingly high quality, and XFree86 upstream releases aren't;
they're code drops that don't work on anything other than i386/powerpc,
usually, and half the time they're even severely brokenn on i386.
Porting it to other architectures is quite a monumental task, so having
4.3.0 as far as we have it is quite a great achievement IMHO.

I've personally stayed silent because that discussion is largely full of
vested political interests, and looks likely to go nowhere. I'm waiting
until real code comes forth.

> > > BTW, when i first login into X, and open an xterm, and try to type into
> > > it, i get some garbage characters (either just a c, or a succession of
> > > cs). Is this a known bug or something ?
> > 
> > Not that I know of, and certainly not without more info.
> 
> What kind of info would be needed ?

XF86Config-4, XFree86.0.log.

-- 
Daniel Stone                                     <dstone@trinity.unimelb.edu.au>
Developer, Trinity College, University of Melbourne

Attachment: pgpFrkTcjI1Zx.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: