xorg development questions and ideas

[Samuel Verstraete]

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 14:36:33 +0200
Zbigniew Luszpinski <zbiggy at o2.pl> wrote:

<<snip>>
> 
> Replacing XOrg by XOrg7 is very bad idea in my opinion. There is a
> lot of work put in XOrg7(.1) by lunar devs and module works. But
> solving all the issues in this decentralised, huge project will take
> some time (mostly 'outside' dependencies compability). Instead I
> think it would be good to replace XOrg with XOrg-test. The XOrg is a
> little bit outdated at 6.8.2 version where XOrg-test is at more
> modern 6.9.0 one. I use XOrg-test almost since beginning and did not
> find any issues except some strange behaviour with symlinks
> generation at build script which causes sometimes loop. But this
> looks the same in both modules.

AFAIK 6.9.0 is never released as a stable branch of the XOrg tree so
i'd vote against moving XOrg-test to Xorg... lets just delete XOrg-test
as the 6.9.0 tree is depreciated anyway.

<<snip>>

> 
> There is one thing lunar devs should consider. How XOrg7 should be
> build? Keeping the same feature/applications list as in 6.9.0 and
> earlier or we build xorg as small as possible and try to extend it
> later using 'required XOrg7 dependency path' mechanism in multimedia
> applications? Before, xorg 6.9.0 and older was distributed as few
> large files and built itself with predefined list of
> features/applications. The XOrg7.0/7.1 and later are modular. Thus it
> is possible to build xorg smaller but less feature/applications
> packed like those old and possibly add future features as required
> dependencies to later build applications like video or 3D. How about
> users who get used to have some apps 'out of the xorg 6.x box'? Like
> xvinfo, glxinfo, xhost etc. Xorg7 runs without them, but some
> applications/users get used to have them without lining them. If you
> decide which way to go let me know so I will change my little fixes
> accordingly.

Our (moe and me) idea was to create one default profile so that all
modules in moonbase can be built against this one (with the exception
of 3-D). I'd like to create a new profile with just all of the modules
there... (for me it would be just for testing purposes). And creating a
minimal profile should be done in zlocal as every user will have a
different view on that.
Adding new dependencies to the current XOrg7 profile should be done
with arguments that show which module needs it.  (will be added like
this in the DEPENDS file of the profile as well). 
Currently i do not think it's interesting to add 3-D stuff... we might
wanna create a new profile for this (adding mesa stuff etc etc) (I know
that the current profile does have some 3-D stuff inside but i'd like
to get rid of it)

Another thing i still have to get rid of is the cvs module of libdrm. I
didn't take a look at it for quite a while. But before we move XOrg7
out of zbeta this should be checked.

> 
> Last question :-)
> How to send xorg7 related patches? As current snapshots with all
> consequences of such sending or as one patch file running across
> moonbase when it will be finished (won't happen fast)?

I'd like to have XOrg7 related patches (depending on the extend) per
module if possible and if ranging more than some modules you might
consider it as a patch agains zbeta/xorg7.0. Please do mind that i need
patches for the xorg7.1 tree as well.

> 
> have a nice day,
> Zbigniew 'zbiggy' Luszpinski

Gr,S. 

> _______________________________________________
> Lunar mailing list
> Lunar at lunar-linux.org
> http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/lunar