On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 02:15:26PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> [2004-06-18 10:34]: > > > * Should we regard X.Org or FreeDesktop.Org as our upstream source? > > > > I'd like to consider X.Org as upstream for libraries and headers; however, > > I'd also like to wait until X.Org has managed to switch to a modular build > > system so that the monolithic release problem can be solved easily. > > I thought X.Org was the monolithic while FreeDesktop.Org the modular > release. Since you mention X.Org and the monolithic release, I guess > this is not correct. Can you explain the difference between X.Org and > FreeDesktop.Org? Well, X.Org currently only has X11R6.7, which is forked from XFree86 4.4RC2, but with some SI-tree changes (mainly from Sun merged), but there is a fork of that tree[0] called 'debrix', which is an all-modular build, but builds the same server, but with a completely incompatible driver loader (libdl), and all drivers built out-of-tree. freedesktop.org has the 'xserver' tree, which contains KDrive (usually referred to as 'the fd.o xserver'), but it is also capable of building XWin (Cygwin/X), and Xizzle DDXes - Xizzle being a fork of the Xorg DDX (xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86, as opposed to all of xc/programs/Xserver), that builds modularly, but using the xserver/KDrive DIX. Unfortunately this didn't work out too well, so Xizzle is deprecated in favour of Debrix, despite having a cooler name. Geddit? [0]: Well, two; you'll see later. -- Daniel Stone <daniels@debian.org> Debian: the universal operating system http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature