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

X Strike Force XFree86 SVN commit: r1401 - in trunk/debian: . patches



Author: branden
Date: 2004-05-13 12:43:29 -0500 (Thu, 13 May 2004)
New Revision: 1401

Removed:
   trunk/debian/patches/009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff
Modified:
   trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
   trunk/debian/TODO
   trunk/debian/patches/911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff
Log:
(cosmetic) Merge patch #009 into patch #911, where it belongs.


Modified: trunk/debian/CHANGESETS
===================================================================
--- trunk/debian/CHANGESETS	2004-05-13 17:23:09 UTC (rev 1400)
+++ trunk/debian/CHANGESETS	2004-05-13 17:43:29 UTC (rev 1401)
@@ -76,4 +76,8 @@
 changes from XFree86 CVS post-2004-02-12 rolled back.
     1400
 
+Move patch in 009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff to
+911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff.
+    1401
+
 vim:set ai et sts=4 sw=4 tw=80:

Modified: trunk/debian/TODO
===================================================================
--- trunk/debian/TODO	2004-05-13 17:23:09 UTC (rev 1400)
+++ trunk/debian/TODO	2004-05-13 17:43:29 UTC (rev 1401)
@@ -12,8 +12,6 @@
 These items are listed in descending order of priority; that is, the most
 important items come first.
 
-* Move patch in 009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff to
-  911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff.
 * Replace 006_dont_ref_rman.man.diff with fix from XFree86 CVS.
 * Replace 013_xkb_symbols_euro_support.diff with fix from XFree86 CVS.
 * Fix upstream install rule that prevents Xcursor themes from being

Deleted: trunk/debian/patches/009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff
===================================================================
--- trunk/debian/patches/009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff	2004-05-13 17:23:09 UTC (rev 1400)
+++ trunk/debian/patches/009_use_xf86config-4_in_xf86config.diff	2004-05-13 17:43:29 UTC (rev 1401)
@@ -1,16 +0,0 @@
-$Id$
-
-Use XF86Config-4 instead of XF86Config, when running xf86config. But you use
-dexconf, right? This patch by Branden Robinson.
-
---- xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86config/xf86config.c.orig	Tue Jan 14 14:47:33 2003
-+++ xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86config/xf86config.c	Tue Jan 14 14:47:45 2003
-@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@
- #define MODULEPATH		TREEROOT "/lib/modules"
- 
- #ifndef XCONFIGFILE
--#define XCONFIGFILE		"XF86Config"
-+#define XCONFIGFILE		"XF86Config-4"
- #endif
- #define CONFIGNAME		XCONFIGFILE
- 

Modified: trunk/debian/patches/911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff
===================================================================
--- trunk/debian/patches/911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff	2004-05-13 17:23:09 UTC (rev 1400)
+++ trunk/debian/patches/911_debian_XF86Config_to_XF86Config-4.diff	2004-05-13 17:43:29 UTC (rev 1401)
@@ -1,5 +1,15 @@
 $Id$
 
+Debian preferentially uses the name XF86Config-4 for the XFree86 4.x X
+server configuration file.  This is for two reasons:
+  1) The XF86Config file format changed from XFree86 3.x to 4.x, and it's
+     not a good practice to change the format of a configuration file while
+     leaving its name the same.
+  2) Debian used to support XFree86 3.x and 4.x in parallel, including the
+     simultaneous installation of XFree86 3.x and 4.x X servers;
+     consequently, each version of the X server needed to be able to read its
+     own particular configuration file -- they could not be named the same.
+
 This patch by Branden Robinson.
 
 --- xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/XF86Config.man~	2003-08-01 15:38:20.000000000 -0500
@@ -226,3 +236,14 @@
  apm(__drivermansuffix__),
  ati(__drivermansuffix__),
  chips(__drivermansuffix__),
+--- xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86config/xf86config.c.orig	Tue Jan 14 14:47:33 2003
++++ xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/xf86config/xf86config.c	Tue Jan 14 14:47:45 2003
+@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@
+ #define MODULEPATH		TREEROOT "/lib/modules"
+ 
+ #ifndef XCONFIGFILE
+-#define XCONFIGFILE		"XF86Config"
++#define XCONFIGFILE		"XF86Config-4"
+ #endif
+ #define CONFIGNAME		XCONFIGFILE
+ 



Reply to: