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

Re: Future of X packages in Debian

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.


[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

Reply to: