David Dawes wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 09:53:40AM -0800, Kendall Bennett wrote:
Clearly the future of XFree86 is very murky right now, as many developers
have left to work on other projects such as freedesktop.org, and now with
the core team disbanded it is unclear exactly how companies
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jan 2004, Martin Spott wrote:
David Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 10:17:30AM -0800, Kendall Bennett wrote:
[...], and I am in discussions
with some of the other members of the community about starting a new
project to take over where
David Dawes wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 11:27:15AM -0800, Richard A. Hecker wrote:
David Dawes wrote:
I believe that this is an acknowlegement that the core team was no longer
representative of the active, experienced and skilled XFree86 developers,
or a place where technical discussion
David,
Upon first inspection it looks like all of the names of people that
contributed Cygwin-related patches are there.
Thanks,
Harold
David Dawes wrote:
I was going to announce this after Christmas, but maybe today is
better.
I'm proposing to add a Credits section to the Release Notes for
The following CVS commit, made by Thomas Dickey, has no indication that
Thomas was either a) not involved at all in the patch or b) that Thomas
found Ralf Habacker's patch and committed a modified version of that patch.
The CVS log message says:
fixes for _XtInherit on cygwin.
The
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
The following CVS commit, made by Thomas Dickey, has no indication that
Thomas was either a) not involved at all in the patch or b) that Thomas
found Ralf Habacker's patch and committed a modified version of that patch.
The CVS
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Your commit didn't mention this either.
Our change log is in our release notes, where the changes were
attributed to Ralf Habacker:
tsk, tsk: the actual commit on the code change bears only your name.
A casual reader
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
XFree86 should be taking care not to steal credit for our patches by
committing them without proper attribution.
your standards are inconsistent: your committing the change rather than
offering commit access to someone who
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Your commit didn't mention this either.
Our change log is in our release notes, where the changes were
attributed to Ralf Habacker:
tsk, tsk: the actual
Alan Hourihane wrote:
On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 02:02:20PM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
The following CVS commit, made by Thomas Dickey, has no indication that
Thomas was either a) not involved at all in the patch or b) that Thomas
found Ralf
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Eric Anholt wrote:
The only responsible thing for you to do would be to correct the
ChangeLog to attribute it to the patch's author.
well that's polite enough.
unlike Harold.
I
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
No, that is not good enough. You should amend your change log entry to
attribute the patch to Ralf and you should apologize to the X community
at large for being so sloppy with attributing credit.
yes, you're right.
Thanks
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
been corrected later, with a follow email from Harold.
It's a simple change to put that right in the CHANGELOG. So I'll do that.
I had that on my next set of commits.
Then why not say so earlier?
There was no point in doing
It seems that David Dawes has made his decision not to let the
Cygwin/XFree86 project commit patches directly to the XFree86.org CVS
tree; he doesn't seem to want to go on record saying this, but he has
written several messages during this discussion about ftp servers, cvs
servers, etc., while
Alan Hourihane wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 11:35:20AM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
6) Alternatives are being evaluated for hosting Cygwin/XFree86 code in
CVS. Hosts that can provide CVS commit access for at least five
Cygwin/XFree86 developers will be given priority.
Harold,
I thought
Craig,
Craig Groeschel wrote:
I'm afraid your rants and threats won't do
much good there though.
Great. Shoot the messenger. (btw, No one is ranting or
threatening. Just being lucid and assertive. IMHO.)
Thanks for your support. I have tried, and failed on occasion, to
maintain my
David Dawes wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 12:37:29PM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Michel Dänzer wrote:
Well, you know, XFree86's disregard for offers to help made by
developers that have been with the project for over two years are
certainly part of the problem.
Err, this is about bug
David Dawes wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 02:34:02PM -0500, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Seriously, I don't know why I waste my time submitting patches that are
specific to my platform and then wait up to three weeks for them
Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Peter Firefly Lund wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, David Dawes wrote:
When I discussed this with you privately a while ago all I got were
disrespectful and insulting responses. Now there is more of the same.
Err... No.
He was quite reasonable, in my
Marc Aurele La France wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Peter Firefly Lund wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, David Dawes wrote:
When I discussed this with you privately a while ago all I got were
disrespectful and insulting responses. Now there is more of the same.
Err... No.
He was quite
Daniel Stone wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 03:51:05PM -0700, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Peter Firefly Lund wrote:
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, David Dawes wrote:
When I discussed this with you privately a while ago all I got were
disrespectful and insulting responses. Now
Torrey,
Looks like you may have had the same sort of trouble that we are now
having with regards to building a shared version of the lesstif
libraries that link to a shared version of the Xt library. The
particular error message, when starting a lesstif app is:
XmManager ClassInitialize:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 17:13, Egbert Eich wrote:
Marc Aurele La France writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is an ML anyone can subscribe to. I am, and, I
believe, so is Egbert.
No, not currently. I usually go to the web interface and
look at the open bugs, process new ones that
which are supposed to
remain undefined are likely being satisfied at library link time so
nothing from lesstif is being included at application link time.
--Torrey
At 2:43 AM -0400 10/25/03, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Torrey,
Looks like you may have had the same sort of trouble that we are now
Egbert Eich wrote:
Marc Aurele La France writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is an ML anyone can subscribe to. I am, and, I
believe, so is Egbert.
No, not currently. I usually go to the web interface and
look at the open bugs, process new ones that can be handled
quickly, or try to assign
I wouldn't be opposed to just wiping out the #ifdef __CYGWIN__ stuff and
starting fresh with a test build. I can always put back any
platform-specific #if's that turn out to still be valid.
Harold
David Dawes wrote:
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 11:00:23PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Wed, Oct
David Dawes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 10:04:55PM -0600, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, David Dawes wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 06:34:53PM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
What happens when I assign patches in the Cygwin Xserver project to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]? Does
Jakub,
I just noticed this thread today. If this will have problems, then they
will definitely be visible on Cygwin. So, I ask that I please be
included in the testing process before this is committed, if it ever is.
I would gladly do test builds under Cygwin to confirm that the new
scheme
David,
David Dawes wrote:
On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 12:13:10AM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
The only suggestion I have is that the function prototypes in
include/os.h should follow the conventions of all other prototypes in
os.h, using #if NeedFunctionPrototypes:
extern void
Matthieu,
The new file, prngc.c, uses sockaddr_storage. However, I know that at
least Cygwin does not have sockaddr_storage.
No alternative is provided and no conditional compilation is in effect
to fall back to previous functionality when sockaddr_storage is not
available. This breaks the
Matthieu (and Matthias),
Matthias Scheler wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:19PM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote:
It seems to me that the C langage version of ucs2any.pl developped by
Ben Collver and other NetBSD developpers is now stable enough to be
included in XFree86.
Two comments:
1.)
David Dawes wrote:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2003 at 02:01:00PM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Matthieu (and Matthias),
Matthias Scheler wrote:
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 10:58:19PM +0200, Matthieu Herrb wrote:
It seems to me that the C langage version of ucs2any.pl developped by
Ben Collver and other
Matthieu,
I appreciate the notification in advance of committing something like
this. I am doing a build test right now on Cygwin. I will let you know
if I find any problems.
Harold
Matthieu Herrb wrote:
Hi,
It seems to me that the C langage version of ucs2any.pl developped by
Ben Collver
Matthieu,
I found two things:
1) In ucs2any.c the libgen.h header is included only to provide
basename, while a local definition of basename is provided for those
platforms that don't have it. However, libgen.h is still included even
on those platforms that define NEED_BASENAME. Thus, the
Todd T. Fries wrote:
Penned by Daniel Stone on Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +1000, we have:
[..]
| I did suggest this (mv hp,v hp.old,v).
If you guys care about history at all, aka the ability to checkout files
in the past, you would not suggest nor impement this suggestion.
Does history
Thomas E. Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Todd T. Fries wrote:
Penned by Daniel Stone on Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 04:51:49PM +1000, we have:
[..]
| I did suggest this (mv hp,v hp.old,v).
If you guys care about history at all, aka the ability to checkout files
Egbert,
My main question here is why does HEAD not have hp while xf-4_3-branch
still does? I can checkout HEAD, but I cannot check out xf-4_3-branch
because hp is in the way.
Do the changes that you applied to HEAD need to be applied to
xf-4_3-branch as well?
Harold
Egbert,
I don't see a way how you can work around this as there seems to
be no way to exclude files from checkout/update.
One could create an alias module in the CVS repositry which excludes
the HP directory. Like
xc-win -a !xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/HP xc
Then doing a
cvs
David Dawes wrote:
On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 01:09:50PM -0400, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
Egbert,
I don't see a way how you can work around this as there seems to
be no way to exclude files from checkout/update.
One could create an alias module in the CVS repositry which excludes
the HP directory
Egbert,
I cannot checkout xf-4_3_0_1 because of this whole hp/HP issue. The
following is from my cvs checkout log:
cvs server: Updating xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry
U xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/Imakefile
U xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/README
U xc/programs/xkbcomp/geometry/amiga
U
Specify :0.1 (note: no hostname) as the DISPLAY. That will use UNIX
domain sockets, which I am assuming that X using when you pass NULL.
Harold
Andriy Rysin wrote:
Just found that if I use 'localhost:0.1' form, XOpenDisplay tries to
connect with TCP stream, while if DISPLAY is NULL it choses
Mark,
Have you tried running 'xset r off'?
Harold
Mark Cuss wrote:
Hello
I'm not sure if this is an X problem or not - if not, please let me know...
I have a Toshiba Satellite 2450 notebook on which I've recently
installed RedHat 8. Everything works OK, except that sometimes in X
when I
Mark Vojkovich wrote:
This is a kernel problem. /dev/console is returning duplicate
key releases and XFree86 doesn't filter it out and sends duplicate
key release events to the clients. I'm told it's fixed in some
newer kernels. It seems to be specific to the Toshiba notebooks.
Mark.
I
patrick charles wrote:
On Thursday 13 February 2003 09:03 pm, David Dawes wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 02:11:40PM -0700, patrick charles wrote:
On Wednesday 12 February 2003 10:20 pm, David Dawes wrote:
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 02:51:04PM -0700, patrick charles wrote:
On Saturday 08
Mike,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf
Of Mike A. Harris
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 2:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Fw: If you were writing a Windows and X clipboard
integration manager...
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Harold L
for your input,
Harold
Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Harold L Hunt II wrote:
...how would you do it, in 150 words or less?
Seriously, I have been working on this for over a year and I would love to
hear some of the ideas that people have because I am completely stumped
Owen,
Owen Taylor wrote:
Harold L Hunt II [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...how would you do it, in 150 words or less?
Seriously, I have been working on this for over a year and I would love to
hear some of the ideas that people have because I am completely stumped on
how to make such a clipboard
Havoc,
Havoc Pennington wrote:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 03:11:08PM -0500, G O Economou wrote:
In fact, I have made 8 releases :) I originally copied text from
CUT_BUFFER0, which worked fine for me. As soon as I released this
people started complaining about what it did not do (namely, it
I have been working on a small X Client called xwinclip for the
Cygwin/XFree86 project (http://xfre86.cygwin.com) for over a year now. The
aim of this program is to provide integration between the Windows clipboard
and the X clipboard, but so far the results have been less than stellar.
There are
49 matches
Mail list logo
