Re: X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r317 - in trunk/debian: . patches
David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:40:59PM -0500, X Strike Force SVN Repository
> Admin wrote:
>> Log:
>> - Patch audit
>> - 913_debian_remove_code_ref_to_object_code_files.diff ported
>> - patch to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/rendition/vboard.c
>> re-added to comply with post-sarge SC
>> - 031_glxinfo_makefile.diff
>> - Removing from TODO. This is a porter issue and I'm going to leave
>> it
>> to them.
>>
>>
>> Modified: trunk/debian/TODO
>> ===================================================================
>> --- trunk/debian/TODO 2005-07-06 03:51:41 UTC (rev 316)
>> +++ trunk/debian/TODO 2005-07-06 04:40:53 UTC (rev 317)
>> @@ -7,17 +7,7 @@
>>
>> xorg-x11 6.8.2-1 (unstable)
>> -----------------------------
>> -* Review all xfree86 4.3.0.dfsg.1-13 and -14 patches. [neroden]
>>
>> -031_glxinfo_makefile.diff
>> - -- Upstream says that it's incorrect and due to a toolchain bug.
>> - Have to see whether it's still needed for GNU/kFreeBSD, and if so,
>> - fix the bug. See Freedesktop Bugzilla #1902.
>> -913_debian_remove_code_ref_to_object_code_files.diff - needs validation
>> - * patch to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/rendition/vboard.c
>> lost - * patches to
>> xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/{mga,rendition}/Imakefile
>> - now in patch 908
>> -
>> * C++ ABI Transition
>>
>> xorg-x11 6.8.2-2 (unstable)
>
> And with that, we now have a fully audited X.Org source tree. I want to
> thank everyone who's helped out with the patch audit, you guys are
> awesome, and I'm hoping you stick around to keep working on X in the
> future, I know I could use the help.
>
> I'm going to try building packages tonight and testing them locally to
> make sure we have them. The next step is the C++ ABI transition, which has
> recently become inevitable to avoid, and as such it has to be done before
> a first upload to unstable. I'm way too tired to come up with a coherent
> plan as of now (having only skimmed the outline from Matthias) so I'll
> tackle this soon.
I'll help you. :-)
xorg-x11 apparently doesn't build-depend on any external C++ libraries
except libstdc++, which makes this rather straightforward.
Of the library packages, only xlibmesa-glu depends on libstdc++. In fact,
it's the only C++ package in the entire xorg tree.
xlibmesa-glu
-- This will need a new package name. It has a really weird package
name right now, so that's good anyway. Ubuntu used libglu1-xorg, which
sounds good to me. :-)
-- And the new package will need to Conflicts:/Replaces: with the old
package.
-- Ubuntu also made this "Provides: libglu1c2" instead of "Provides:
libglu1". This makes sense since there are alternative
providers of libGLU.1.
xlibmesa-glu-dev
-- A new name is desirable because we're cleaning up the package
name. Probably Conflicts:/Provides:/Replaces: in this case.
Ubuntu used libglu-dev-xorg, which sounds good to me.
xlibmesa-glu-dbg
-- Likewise, new name and Conflicts:/Replaces:. Ubuntu used
libglu1-dbg-xorg, which sounds good to me.
This migration was done in Ubuntu's 6.8.2-11. Along with gobs of other
stuff, of course.
xlibmesa3 (transitional package) depends on xlibmesa-glu
xlibmesa-dev (transitional package) depends on xlibmesa-glu-dev
-- These two should IMNSHO just be dropped, since direct upgrades from woody
to etch aren't supported anyway IIRC. Ubuntu kept them, but I don't know
why.
xbase-clients depends on xlibmesa-glu
x-window-system-core (metapackage) depends on xlibmesa-glu and xbase-clients
x-window-system-dev (metapackage) depends on xlibmesa-glu-dev
-- these will have dependency changes only
The remaining packages depend only on program packages, not library
packages, but I list them anyway just in case:
xdm depends on xbase-clients
x-window-system (metapackage) depends on xdm
xprint-common (from xprint) depends on xbase-clients,
and xprt depends on xprt-common
-- Incidentally, the xprint dependencies are *broken* in the current tree,
since xprint-common doesn't provide xprt-common.
xprt should "Depends: xprint-common | xpt-common", I think.
That's it for the actual ABI transition. GCC4 build fixes may also be
needed.
> Daniel and Ubuntu have already made the transition, and
> if it doesn't involve very much then we can get it done quickly.
I believe he's included a number of GCC4 build fixes, some of which may be
needed.
> After that, I'm going to get approval from the release team for the actual
> upload.
First we should review the packages to make sure they're all
(a) installable in unstable -- the xprt-common thing would suck
(b) haven't had large accidental manifest changes (debdiff)
(c) haven't had accidental soname changes (which would really cause trouble;
debdiff again)
Those should *not* take long.
> They're wary of having too many major transitions going on at
> once, but I know they want to see X.Org in the archive as well, so
> hopefully we can speed things along without making their lives hell.
>
> Anyways, congratulations everyone, we've earned it. It's great to see the
> massive patch list gone for now, and only one thing left standing in our
> way.
>
> - David Nusinow
--
Don't say I didn't warn you.
Reply to: