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

Re: X11R7.2

Hi Timo,

On Fri, Feb  9, 2007 at 17:02:46 +0200, Timo Aaltonen wrote:

> For some strange reason I started to update the Ubuntu xorg-stuff two
> nights ago, and I spent most of yesterday merging xserver-xorg. So, in
> order to avoid duplicate effor I've put xorg-server here for you to
> take a look:
> http://users.tkk.fi/~tjaalton/xorg72/
> I hope it makes it easy for you to cherry pick what you find useful..
> (note that I haven't even built it yet)
I just looked at your diff.gz, and here are some comments:
- the serverabiver file doesn't seem to be used anywhere (at least on a
  quick grep in the drivers I didn't find anything), do we need to keep
- when you sync from debian, it seems that the old ubuntu changelog
  entries are removed, which means the explanation for your patches
  disappear, if they're not in the patch header; it makes it difficult
  to know what the patches are supposed to fix (patch 102, eg)

Patches we don't seem to have:
* 102_ubuntu_sharevts_load_cpu.patch
* 110_fedora_no_move_damage.patch
* 104_fedora_init_origins_fix.patch
* 106_ubuntu_fpic_libxf86config.patch (don't know what this is supposed to
  do, libxf86config is a static lib afaics, it shouldn't need -fPIC)
* 107_fedora_dont_backfill_bg_none.patch
* 108_fedora_gl_include_inferiors.patch
* 114_fedora_no_composite_in_xnest.patch
* 120_fedora_disable_offscreen_pixmaps.diff
* 121_only_switch_vt_when_active.diff
* 123_no_composite_for_xvfb_run.patch (adds -extension Composite to
  XVFBARGS in debian/local/xvfb-run, we may want to include that?)

Does anyone know the status of these patches wrt upstream inclusion?
Patch 114 explicitely says it's a "terrible hack", so that one probably
doesn't qualify :)


Attachment: pgpPebb1C60as.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: