[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
Umm, Are we done boys.. Thanks Alan, I am on there mailing list so I seen then new release. I have my hands full at the moment, however I will continue to monitor this thread closely. Thanks, Edward. 2008/11/5 Martin Bochnig martin at martux.org: On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Alan Coopersmith Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com wrote: Martin Bochnig wrote: Until the we don't integrate your SPARC-Xorg patches thing. [...] It was work in progress (SPARC-1.5.x move and also xcb) until you informed me about not having any plans to use my contributions. This thread is getting pointless, but just because it seems you might not understand me - Ever tried to understand me? when I said that we haven't made plans yet, I didn't mean it would never happen, was not going to happen, was planned not to happen, or anything like that. This sounds much better (and a bit different). Indeed, I did not understand you. Because it was - at the minimum - ambiguous. Maybe Lost in translation.? Mhhh, may-be. Although your examples with Belenix and Nextenda didn't suggest it was only a misunderstanding. In this pretext I would be willing to continue the merge of my legacy-SPARC patches into your group's 1.5.2 gate as planned, but before I do the push, it first needs to function (with the upgraded libpciaccess) on at least some of my test systems. I can only do it in my spare time, because of my new job as Java-developer. But as it would be a pity to throw everything away I will continue with it. Martin Bochnig C, C++ Java -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ xwin-discuss mailing list xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org -- All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents from this email address. The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to read international standards and who use proprietary products such as MS Office. See: http://www.openoffice.org/ Edward O'Callaghan. -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan http://moonshine.opn4.org/ http://www.pcbsd.org/
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Alan Coopersmith Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com wrote: Martin Bochnig wrote: No, thanks, I wasn't suggesting you do anything - who said you were the only person here? Edward had expressed interest in working on libxcb himself, and others have expressed interest in knowing what's going on there. Oh, I thought you were referring to the very beginning of above thread (2 weeks ago). I have continued this work. My original plan was to surprise everybody with the fruits. Until the we don't integrate your SPARC-Xorg patches thing. WHY should I (or another external person) ever work on the fox-gate again? For the same reason anyone works on any open source - because it interests you and you're willing to make it available to others, but without knowing if anyone will use it until you put it out there. At the end everything is ready and nobody moves it upstream. Nobody in this case includes you. If we were to follow the strict OpenSolaris development process used by other gates, then it would be up to you to file bug reports for specific changes, request a sponsor to putback those changes, and prepare any necessary code ARC reviews for those changes. That I've done all that work myself to integrate changes from you Moinak is an exception, not the intended normal process. I'm sorry that I'm not putting in 24 hours a day to do all the work I need to do, and do all this for you as well, and that no one else has volunteered to do so either. A year back, when the fox-gate was set up, it had been without any question that SPARC-Xorg would be used for one or more of Sun's distros. SPARC Xorg is already in Sun's distros and will continue to be. I rarely smiled like that: Which hardware does it support? Only m64 (unaccellerated with wsfb) and the XVR-2500? Also, not on the new post 2002-era hardware platforms, because this xserver was not based on Sun's libpciaccess port yet. But also not on most old PCI-bridges, because for this to work you would have been required to follow my recommendations (magic flags for sparcPci.c). Come on, Xorg in SXCE and Solaris 10 is not very useful right now, not for running it as server. It will only work on the Ultra5 and Ultra10 pci-bridge and only unaccellerated with m64. Show me a box where you can bring up the shipping Xorg with a XVR-2500, I would be interested. Cannot be many scenarios where it actually starts up without crashing. How much of your work will go in, I really don't know - I've not had time to look at it to see how much we will want to use, and I can't say whether or not we'll ship any of the open drivers - maybe we will, maybe we won't - it's not decided yet. If it only appears in Natamar, Martux, Belenix, Nexenta or other distros, is that really so horrible? Which of the distros you mentioned are available for SPARC? Which of those that are not have expressed plans to support SPARC in the future? Given your style of arguing you could make a promising career in politics. Assuming I could afford it to start working on xcb (another month for free), Please don't work on xcb - go find yourself a paying job. Since last week I now got one. This is exactly the reason that I know it in precise monetary numbers what your fox-gate has costed me over the years. The message was not intended for you, but for anyone who has an interest in xcb. No, why not? Am I not reader of this list? Didn't I state and show earlier, that I also belong to those who are interested in xcb? Note further that I wrote why should I (or any other external person) I'm not speaking as Martin Bochnig alone, I'm speaking as community member and reader of this list. It's starting to become hard for me to continue communicating with the xwin-discuss list, since I'm tired of getting attacked by you in response to every message. I have to remember that there are over 100 other subscribers who actually want to know what's going on and appreciate the truth The truth? Shall I repeat it? You should not be upset if somebody tells you the truth once in a month. If somebody does have a reason to be disillusioned, disappointed and upset, then this includes me, pretty much at the beginning. It was work in progress (SPARC-1.5.x move and also xcb) until you informed me about not having any plans to use my contributions. It would have been better you had told me in advance (April or earlier 2007). If you prefer to argue I can post your own quotes from back then to the list. But in fact I have more lucrative work to do now. Thanks for having worked with me, apologies again, that I ever dared to interfere your xwin-discuss communication with a few good ideas (I know that one has to apologize if one contributes longer-term stuff for free here, unless one expects literally nothing at all). Thread closed. Respectfully, never again, Martin Bochnig about the status of work in progress. -- -Alan
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
Martin Bochnig wrote: Until the we don't integrate your SPARC-Xorg patches thing. [...] It was work in progress (SPARC-1.5.x move and also xcb) until you informed me about not having any plans to use my contributions. This thread is getting pointless, but just because it seems you might not understand me - when I said that we haven't made plans yet, I didn't mean it would never happen, was not going to happen, was planned not to happen, or anything like that. I really truly meant we don't know yet. We also have no plans yet to move to Xorg 1.6, to support the video cards that ATI nvidia will be coming out with in 2010, or do all sorts of other things - we can only do so many things at once, and can't honestly make plans yet for things we don't have enough information about. We do plan to look at your SPARC driver work in the future, but have to get other things done first, like finishing up the migration of our old closed code base to the current open source base, getting 2008.11 out the door and getting Xorg 1.5.x ready to integrate. It is hard to understand your corporation's philosophy: Not to use stuff that has been created only for you, for free: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/fox/SPARC-Xorg/ You may not have been paid for it, but it's not free of cost to ship. Sun will have to pay engineers to do work to integrate, test, and maintain it if it is to be included in our distros, not just once, but on an ongoing basis. (And if it goes not just into a OpenSolaris release, but a full Solaris release, that's a 10+ year support commitment.) As our CEO likes to say It's free like a puppy - you may not be paying for the dog, but if you keep it you'll be paying for food, vet bills, etc. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Alan Coopersmith Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com wrote: Martin Bochnig wrote: Until the we don't integrate your SPARC-Xorg patches thing. [...] It was work in progress (SPARC-1.5.x move and also xcb) until you informed me about not having any plans to use my contributions. This thread is getting pointless, but just because it seems you might not understand me - Ever tried to understand me? when I said that we haven't made plans yet, I didn't mean it would never happen, was not going to happen, was planned not to happen, or anything like that. This sounds much better (and a bit different). Indeed, I did not understand you. Because it was - at the minimum - ambiguous. Maybe Lost in translation.? Mhhh, may-be. Although your examples with Belenix and Nextenda didn't suggest it was only a misunderstanding. In this pretext I would be willing to continue the merge of my legacy-SPARC patches into your group's 1.5.2 gate as planned, but before I do the push, it first needs to function (with the upgraded libpciaccess) on at least some of my test systems. I can only do it in my spare time, because of my new job as Java-developer. But as it would be a pity to throw everything away I will continue with it. Martin Bochnig C, C++ Java -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:41 AM, Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com wrote: Right.. Not sure what you mean about xcb being large and complex ? So what am I to do to accelerate this process ? Martin:If you send me your pkgdef I can maintain then and improve/clean up other things such as CFLAGS or whatever, and when Alan feels ready about integrating I can push them up myself? Regards, Edward. Edward, when Alan Coopersmith (or other X11-group members) speak(s) about complexity, what he then is talking about is not, to somehow get something built in some way, a bit. Especially libX11 has been a case, where the ABI has changed quite a bit over the years, which constituted a problem when replacing ((X11 6.4's legacy libX11) + (Sun's patches)) with (modern X11 7.x's libX11 from Xorg). This is indeed a bit complex, also - sometimes there can be side-effects which you don't instantly see, and it definitely required some thoughts, work and testing, as you can verify by yourself here (and localization has to be taken into account as well) :: http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/fox/fox-gate/XW_NV/open-src/lib/libX11/ NameDateSize 1234757.patch 07-Aug-2008 6.8K 1261271.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.9K 4010755.patch 07-Aug-2008 8K 4076297.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.6K 4614834.patch 07-Aug-2008 3.7K 5039226.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.6K 6409332.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.3K 6657999.patch 07-Aug-2008 751 6681985.patch 08-Sep-2008 901.4K 6686591.patch 07-Aug-2008 368 6690040.patch 07-Aug-2008 3.3K 6690054.patch 07-Aug-2008 620 6691219.patch 07-Aug-2008 721 6691236.patch 07-Aug-2008 367 6715568.patch 07-Aug-2008 356 6739431.patch 10-Oct-2008 1K lintlib.patch 07-Aug-2008 1.6K local-transport.patch 07-Aug-2008 11.8K Makefile10-Oct-2008 4.5K manpages.patch 07-Aug-2008 80.7K mapfile-order 12-Aug-2008 28.2K mapfile-vers07-Aug-2008 20.9K mapfile-vers-64 07-Aug-2008 1.9K sme.patch 07-Aug-2008 27.4K solaris-abi.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.7K solaris-i18n.patch 07-Aug-2008 1.7M solaris-kbd.patch 07-Aug-2008 25.4K SolarisIA.patch 07-Aug-2008 2.9K sun-src/07-Aug-2008 XErrorDB.patch 07-Aug-2008 3.7K See the point now? What the X11 group does has to be compatible with everything that Sun or a commercial 3rd party ever shipped during (at least) the last 10 years. Don't underestimate the X11 group's huge amount of complex work. (And be more patient when you file bugs, for example, 5 days are not enough to get a rare hw problem fixed.) Only as info (for what it is worth, or how shall I say). Regards, Martin 2008/10/29 Alan Coopersmith Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com: Edward O'Callaghan wrote: 2.) XCB is part of the 7.2 release, including libX11 based on XCB for its transport... So that is all part of the fox7.3-merg anyway is it not ? No. We did not pull it in with 7.2 and are not pulling it it with 7.4. It is too large and complex a project to just roll in on the side of a version bump, and we need to understand the libX11 interactions better first. It's absolutely something we want to do, just not something we've had time to do justice to yet.(It's only been a few months since we finally got libX11 to a X11R7.x version so we could even have the option of doing it.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering -- All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents from this email address. The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to read international standards and who use proprietary products such as MS Office. See: http://www.openoffice.org/ Edward O'Callaghan. -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan http://moonshine.opn4.org/ http://www.pcbsd.org/ ___ xwin-discuss mailing list xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Martin Bochnig martin at martux.org wrote: On 10/28/08, Stefan Teleman stefan.teleman at gmail.com wrote: 2. IIRC i'm pretty sure having xcb changes libX11 (libX11 can be built with or without xcb awareness) -- and we need to double-check if this would change libX11's ABI. 4. We would like to be able to run the unit tests. Just in case. :-) 5. XDM support would be something nice to have. imho. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.teleman at gmail.com Stefan, before we test the libX11'sABI for the differences and potential binary incompatibilities, I first put everything in place so that it builds (except the pkgdefs which come later). As workaround for Python 2.5 - for now - I simply downgrade version of libxcb. I also have enabled xdm and in libX11 support for / awareness of xcb. %martin I just noticed, that the python versionitis (reminds me of the auto-tools) is a problem which does not exist anymore. I'm currently working on a Blade 100 running yesterdays new SXCE snv_101. Don't know when exactly Python 2.5.x has been added to it, but now it _is_ bundled: bash-3.2$ ls -al /usr/bin/python* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root9 Oct 29 15:24 /usr/bin/python - python2.4 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Oct 29 15:24 /usr/bin/python2.4 - sparcv7/isapython2.4 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 Oct 29 15:32 /usr/bin/python2.5 - sparcv7/isapython2.5 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root bin 1418 Oct 7 07:29 /usr/bin/python2.5-config bash-3.2$ uname -a SunOS SunBlade-100 5.11 snv_101 sun4u sparc SUNW,Sun-Blade-100 Solaris bash-3.2$ /usr/bin/python2.5 Python 2.5.2 (r252:60911, Oct 7 2008, 06:24:02) [C] on sunos5 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. Sans souci :) To lib/libxcb/Makefile I added MODULE_CONFIG_ENV=PYTHON=/usr/bin/python2.5 This should work, but the poor Blade 100 needs a few weeks until it comes to that point (because at first I want to polulate / initialize) my save-electricity second (24x7) workspace. I switched off the Blade 2000 now that I got my year-end power bill :-( -- %martin
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com wrote: Martin, I think you missed my point entirely. Your GMAT coach would tell you, that this is a weak statement, because you don't provide a single reason for your beliefs. But you are right, I have been confusing a few things, otherwise I would not have taken the time. I won't commit my changeset and happily return this proposal to where it came from. -- %martin bochnig Alan, Thanks for the more informed answer.. However, what I am _try_ to ask for here is guide lines, I am prepared to work on this. What CFLAGS did you want me to build with, what compiler etc.. ? I will look into the above cases as soon as I know the FOX 'standard way of building foo' Its quite involved but this could be a good project for me to get the ball rolling on it.. Best Regards, Edward. 2008/10/30 Alan Coopersmith Alan.Coopersmith at sun.com: Martin Bochnig wrote: I just noticed, that the python versionitis (reminds me of the auto-tools) is a problem which does not exist anymore. I'm currently working on a Blade 100 running yesterdays new SXCE snv_101. Don't know when exactly Python 2.5.x has been added to it, but now it _is_ bundled: snv_99: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=600 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ xwin-discuss mailing list xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org -- All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents from this email address. The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to read international standards and who use proprietary products such as MS Office. See: http://www.openoffice.org/ Edward O'Callaghan. -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan http://moonshine.opn4.org/ http://www.pcbsd.org/ ___ xwin-discuss mailing list xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
I just though I would share this; cd xcb-util-0.3.0 export M4=/usr/gnu/bin/m4 PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/lib/pkgconfig [edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-util-0.3.0:~./configure checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/ginstall -c checking whether build environment is sane... yes checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /usr/gnu/bin/mkdir -p checking for gawk... no checking for mawk... no checking for nawk... nawk checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes checking for m4... /usr/gnu/bin/m4 checking for gperf... gperf checking for gcc... gcc checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out checking whether the C compiler works... yes checking whether we are cross compiling... no checking for suffix of executables... checking for suffix of object files... o checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed checking for style of include used by make... GNU checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3 checking build system type... i386-pc-solaris2.11 checking host system type... i386-pc-solaris2.11 checking for a sed that does not truncate output... /usr/bin/gsed checking for grep that handles long lines and -e... /usr/bin/ggrep checking for egrep... /usr/bin/ggrep -E checking for ld used by gcc... /usr/ccs/bin/ld checking if the linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) is GNU ld... no checking for /usr/ccs/bin/ld option to reload object files... -r checking for BSD-compatible nm... /usr/xpg4/bin/nm -p checking whether ln -s works... yes checking how to recognize dependent libraries... pass_all checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E checking for ANSI C header files... yes checking for sys/types.h... yes checking for sys/stat.h... yes checking for stdlib.h... yes checking for string.h... yes checking for memory.h... yes checking for strings.h... yes checking for inttypes.h... yes checking for stdint.h... yes checking for unistd.h... yes checking dlfcn.h usability... yes checking dlfcn.h presence... yes checking for dlfcn.h... yes checking for g++... g++ checking whether we are using the GNU C++ compiler... yes checking whether g++ accepts -g... yes checking dependency style of g++... gcc3 checking how to run the C++ preprocessor... g++ -E checking for g77... g77 checking whether we are using the GNU Fortran 77 compiler... yes checking whether g77 accepts -g... yes checking the maximum length of command line arguments... 786240 checking command to parse /usr/xpg4/bin/nm -p output from gcc object... ok checking for objdir... .libs checking for ar... ar checking for ranlib... ranlib checking for strip... strip checking if gcc supports -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions... no checking for gcc option to produce PIC... -fPIC checking if gcc PIC flag -fPIC works... yes checking if gcc static flag -static works... no checking if gcc supports -c -o file.o... yes checking whether the gcc linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes checking whether -lc should be explicitly linked in... yes checking dynamic linker characteristics... solaris2.11 ld.so checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate checking whether stripping libraries is possible... no checking if libtool supports shared libraries... yes checking whether to build shared libraries... yes checking whether to build static libraries... yes configure: creating libtool appending configuration tag CXX to libtool checking for ld used by g++... /usr/ccs/bin/ld checking if the linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) is GNU ld... no checking whether the g++ linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes checking for g++ option to produce PIC... -fPIC checking if g++ PIC flag -fPIC works... yes checking if g++ static flag -static works... no checking if g++ supports -c -o file.o... yes checking whether the g++ linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes checking dynamic linker characteristics... solaris2.11 ld.so (cached) (cached) checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate appending configuration tag F77 to libtool checking if libtool supports shared libraries... yes checking whether to build shared libraries... yes checking whether to build static libraries... yes checking for g77 option to produce PIC... -fPIC checking if g77 PIC flag -fPIC works... yes checking if g77 static flag -static works... no checking if g77 supports -c -o file.o... yes checking whether the g77 linker (/usr/ccs/bin/ld) supports shared libraries... yes checking dynamic linker characteristics... solaris2.11 ld.so (cached) (cached) checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate checking for vasprintf... no checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes checking for XCB... yes checking for XCB_SHM... yes checking for XCB_RENDER... yes configure: creating ./config.status config.status: creating Makefile config.status: creating
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
Oh I forgot to change the top from
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~export CC=cc
to
export CC=cc CXX=CC PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/lib/pkgconfig
Regards,
2008/10/29 Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com:
Hi,
I have XCB compiling cleanly on solaris.
Could we add this to FOX please ?
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB:~cat get_xcb.sh
#!/bin/sh
wget http://xcb.freedesktop.org/dist/libxcb-1.1.91.tar.bz2
wget http://xcb.freedesktop.org/dist/xcb-proto-1.2.tar.bz2
# wget http://xcb.freedesktop.org/dist/xcb-util-0.3.0.tar.bz2
wget http://xcb.freedesktop.org/dist/libpthread-stubs-0.1.tar.bz2
...
bunzip2 -cd xcb-proto-1.2.tar.bz2 | tar -xf -
cd xcb-proto-1.2/
...
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~export CC=cc
CXX=CC PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/lib/pkgconfig
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~./configure
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/ginstall -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /usr/gnu/bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... no
checking for mawk... no
checking for nawk... nawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking for xmllint... /usr/bin/xmllint
checking for a Python interpreter with version = 2.5... python2.5
checking for python2.5... /usr/bin/python2.5
checking for python2.5 version... 2.5
checking for python2.5 platform... sunos5
checking for python2.5 script directory...
${prefix}/lib/python2.5/site-packages
checking for python2.5 extension module directory...
${exec_prefix}/lib/python2.5/site-packages
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating src/Makefile
config.status: creating xcbgen/Makefile
config.status: creating xcb-proto.pc
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~make check
Making check in src
make check-local
/usr/bin/xmllint --noout --schema ./xcb.xsd ./*.xml
./bigreq.xml validates
./composite.xml validates
./damage.xml validates
./dpms.xml validates
./glx.xml validates
./randr.xml validates
./record.xml validates
./render.xml validates
./res.xml validates
./screensaver.xml validates
./shape.xml validates
./shm.xml validates
./sync.xml validates
./xc_misc.xml validates
./xevie.xml validates
./xf86dri.xml validates
./xfixes.xml validates
./xinerama.xml validates
./xinput.xml validates
./xprint.xml validates
./xproto.xml validates
./xselinux.xml validates
./xtest.xml validates
./xv.xml validates
./xvmc.xml validates
Making check in xcbgen
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~make
Making all in src
Making all in xcbgen
[edward at SXCE-Workstation]:/AuroraUX/XCB/xcb-proto-1.2:~pfexec make install
Making install in src
test -z /usr/local/share/xcb || /usr/gnu/bin/mkdir -p /usr/local/share/xcb
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xcb.xsd' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xcb.xsd'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xproto.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xproto.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'bigreq.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/bigreq.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'composite.xml'
'/usr/local/share/xcb/composite.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'damage.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/damage.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'dpms.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/dpms.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'glx.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/glx.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'randr.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/randr.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'record.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/record.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'render.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/render.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'res.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/res.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'screensaver.xml'
'/usr/local/share/xcb/screensaver.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'shape.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/shape.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'shm.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/shm.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'sync.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/sync.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xc_misc.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xc_misc.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xevie.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xevie.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xf86dri.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xf86dri.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xfixes.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xfixes.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xinerama.xml'
'/usr/local/share/xcb/xinerama.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xinput.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xinput.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xprint.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xprint.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xselinux.xml'
'/usr/local/share/xcb/xselinux.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xtest.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xtest.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xv.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xv.xml'
/usr/bin/ginstall -c -m 644 'xvmc.xml' '/usr/local/share/xcb/xvmc.xml'
Making install in xcbgen
test -z /usr/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages/xcbgen ||
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
Hi Stefan, 1.) Just past the --prefix= ,no? 2.) XCB is part of the 7.2 release, including libX11 based on XCB for its transport... So that is all part of the fox7.3-merg anyway is it not ? 3.) I am not a FOX contrib as such so please guide me and I will do what is necessary. 4.) See (3.) Its on there TODO list - http://xcb.freedesktop.org/TODO/ 5.) Not important right now?? I would be happy to work out small problems if you outline them. As I really need this integrated for my distro I want everything upstream.. Best Regards, Edward. 2008/10/29 Stefan Teleman stefan.teleman at gmail.com: On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have XCB compiling cleanly on solaris. Could we add this to FOX please ? Package: libxcb 1.1.91 Configuration XDM support.: no Build unit tests: no Used CFLAGS: CPPFLAGS: CFLAGS..: -g Warning CFLAGS..: -v Installation: Prefix..: /usr/local Nitpicking: 1. It can't go in /usr/local. It should go in /usr/X11 -- which is where all the other X libs live. 2. IIRC i'm pretty sure having xcb changes libX11 (libX11 can be built with or without xcb awareness) -- and we need to double-check if this would change libX11's ABI. 3. $(CFLAGS) should be those used in FOX for all the other X libraries. 4. We would like to be able to run the unit tests. Just in case. :-) 5. XDM support would be something nice to have. imho. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.teleman at gmail.com -- All Documents adhered to the ISO/IEC 26300 standard file format for electronic office documents, such as spreadsheets, charts, presentations and word processing documents from this email address. The author does not take responsibility of the recipients inability to read international standards and who use proprietary products such as MS Office. See: http://www.openoffice.org/ Edward O'Callaghan. -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EdwardOcallaghan http://moonshine.opn4.org/ http://www.pcbsd.org/
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have XCB compiling cleanly on solaris. Could we add this to FOX please ? Package: libxcb 1.1.91 Configuration XDM support.: no Build unit tests: no Used CFLAGS: CPPFLAGS: CFLAGS..: -g Warning CFLAGS..: -v Installation: Prefix..: /usr/local Nitpicking: 1. It can't go in /usr/local. It should go in /usr/X11 -- which is where all the other X libs live. 2. IIRC i'm pretty sure having xcb changes libX11 (libX11 can be built with or without xcb awareness) -- and we need to double-check if this would change libX11's ABI. 3. $(CFLAGS) should be those used in FOX for all the other X libraries. 4. We would like to be able to run the unit tests. Just in case. :-) 5. XDM support would be something nice to have. imho. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.teleman at gmail.com
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
This is clear, Steafan. I didn't found it important enough to even mention it. %martin On 10/28/08, Stefan Teleman stefan.teleman at gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Edward O'Callaghan victoredwardocallaghan at gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have XCB compiling cleanly on solaris. Could we add this to FOX please ? Package: libxcb 1.1.91 Configuration XDM support.: no Build unit tests: no Used CFLAGS: CPPFLAGS: CFLAGS..: -g Warning CFLAGS..: -v Installation: Prefix..: /usr/local Nitpicking: 1. It can't go in /usr/local. It should go in /usr/X11 -- which is where all the other X libs live. 2. IIRC i'm pretty sure having xcb changes libX11 (libX11 can be built with or without xcb awareness) -- and we need to double-check if this would change libX11's ABI. 3. $(CFLAGS) should be those used in FOX for all the other X libraries. 4. We would like to be able to run the unit tests. Just in case. :-) 5. XDM support would be something nice to have. imho. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.teleman at gmail.com ___ xwin-discuss mailing list xwin-discuss at opensolaris.org
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
I didn't found it important enough to even mention it. Mhh, corrected word order and i instead of 'o': I didn't even find it important enough to actually mention it. -- %martin
[xwin-discuss] XCB port to solaris
Edward O'Callaghan wrote: 2.) XCB is part of the 7.2 release, including libX11 based on XCB for its transport... So that is all part of the fox7.3-merg anyway is it not ? No. We did not pull it in with 7.2 and are not pulling it it with 7.4. It is too large and complex a project to just roll in on the side of a version bump, and we need to understand the libX11 interactions better first. It's absolutely something we want to do, just not something we've had time to do justice to yet.(It's only been a few months since we finally got libX11 to a X11R7.x version so we could even have the option of doing it.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith at sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
