Re: Start preparing xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-2
On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2004 at 07:56:06AM +0200, Fabio Massimo Di Nitto wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > a few hours ago 4.3.0.dfsg.1-1 has been uploaded and it will hit
> > the mirrors within tomorrow.
>
> Hats off, Fabio! You have my deepest thanks for handling this
> responsibility, and handling it well.
Well thanks also to all your work in cleaning up my logs and errors here
and there ;)
> > >From the TODO list, I think we should proceed in the following order of
> > priorities:
> >
> > - ---> subliminal message: fix whatever I broke with 4.3.0.dfsg.1-1 <---
The ATI/radeon problem has been fixed by Herbert already in the new kernel
upload -4. We need to investigate the mga driver to verify who needs to
work on it.
> There are some reports trickling in that the damn kernel 2.6 "This is a
> bug in XFree86. This is a bug in XFree86. This is a bug in XFree86.
> This is a bug in XFree86." problem isn't truly resolved.
>
> We'll have to wait and see how that develops. Not your fault in any
> case.
The one i saw was still to 4.3.0-7, but i went trough it very very fast.
> > * steal {U,}XTerm* app-defaults updates from HEAD and resync patches
>
> I think I will pull from Thomas (Dickey's) releases instead. With
> XFree86 (implicitly) slapping their new license on all the Imakefiles, I
> don't feel like messing with upstream CVS.
[SNIP]
agreed. more we stay away from the licence mess better is.
> > * Fix upstream install rule that prevents Xcursor themes from being
> > installed on s390. As I understand it, this is client-side stuff and
> > there's not really any reason it shouldn't be made available on the s390
> > architecture.
> >
> > * Fix other gratuitous differences between s390 debehlper files and the
> > generic ones by fixing upstream Imakeage to not turn extra stuff off when
> > the XFree86 X server is not being built (like xmodmap.std). It ships
> > libXxf86vm.a but not the corresponding manpages.
>
> Be warned; I know my way around Imake fairly well by now (though I'm hardly an
> expert), but the above could be time consuming. I think we should be
> prepared to defer these in favor either of other fixes or just getting
> the release out the door.
Sure. Mine is just a list. We will do as much as we can. Also removing or
postponing items if required.
More generally, I would like that people read my messages as a direction
to go, but not a strict rule to follow.
> > For this release, other than the 4 bug fixes, we will work mainly on
> > resync and cleanup. If -1 and -2 will not show big problems we might want
> > to consider slightly bigger changes for -3, like the rewrite
> > xserver-xfree86 debconfage. Time will tell.
>
> Yeah, I'm not quite ready for a commit of the stuff I've got in my
> working copy.
Do you have a branch for it? or only a local copy?
> See above. As I feared, David Dawes has not replied to my request for a
> clarification on what the heck is going on with this "implicit relicense
> even if neither the file nor the commit message say so" business, so I
> think that everything failing the criteria I outlined above needs to be
> regarded as poisonous.
agreed.. as above ;)
Thanks
Fabio
--
<user> fajita: step one
<fajita> Whatever the problem, step one is always to look in the error log.
<user> fajita: step two
<fajita> When in danger or in doubt, step two is to scream and shout.
Reply to: