Harold L Hunt II wrote: > Warren, > > Most people are probably smart enough not to respond to this... so I > will take the plunge for all of them :) > > Autotooling xrandr might not have been too hard, for one platform and > one version of the autotools. > > However, autotooling X as a whole might be a much larger job than you > are thinking of. For example, the current system supports cross > compiling quite well, which you would have to be careful not to break in > autotool scripts (again, on all supported platforms). For another > example, X can be built on Cygwin and OS/2, both of which has strange > handling of executable extentions and lots of special linker magic to > make things work. > > Currently all of this magic is contained explicitly and implicitly in > Imakefiles. It might be easy for you to autotool what is explicity > mentioned in the Imakefiles, but it will be a very large job to autotool > all of the implicit things going on behind the scenes. In other words, > you can't just look at a given Imakefile and autotool it... you have to > grok all of the *.cf files for the various supported platforms to > understand what different combinations of flags are supposed to do. > > If you have thought of all of this and are still interested, then best > of luck. However, I wouldn't expect a lot of interest from others, as > this gets mentioned every so often but the person suggesting it often > gives up after they realize how large of a job it is. Thus, a lot of > people are probably going to assume that you will give up as others > before you have. > > Harold
Is there any chance of upstream acceptance of this type of work? A lot of the utility binaries should be pretty easy to break out the xc hierarchy. Warren Turkal -- Treasurer, GOLUM, Inc. http://www.golum.org _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
