On Sun, Jan 06, 2008 at 01:55:17PM -0500, Nicholas Wourms wrote: >On Dec 11, 2007 11:49 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote: >> Janjaap Bos wrote: >> > The changes I made are all in the patch. Let me know when you have >> > suggestions, and whether you're able to build it. Perhaps Yaakov is >> > willing to check it with his findings. >> >> Thank you VERY much. I will try to look into this into the near future, >> as the server is the only holdup in getting X11R7 finished on Cygwin. >> >Hi all, > >Have you guys checked out the Xming patches >(http://www.straightrunning.com/XmingCode/)? Most of them modify code >that is the same as we use and contain many fixes to current problems >we are experiencing, such as the 24bpp issue. Also, a lot of AG's >fixes he did not commit to either trunk or the cygwin branch. He's >also come up with a rather unsavory, yet workable hack to the >overloaded function issue. There are a ton of DD improvements to the >GLX acceleration code, too. Admittedly, the person who runs that >project is still using monolithic as the base and has a rather bizarre >way of updating the sources uses modular code, but still, it ought to >be worthwhile to check out. Unfortunately, he keeps his latest changes >behind a "donation" paywall, but I'm sure if asked by a well know >cygwin-xorg developer, he would be willing to part with them. > >As for the overloaded function problem, I do recall we had this same >issue back in 2002-2003 with shared libXt. You might want to search >through the archives on that one for the whole story. It was a real >frustrating problem to deal with, but a good solution was found that >worked well. > >I had a thought on packaging. Perhaps we should adopt the Fedora >scheme? I mean they seem to have packaged it nicely without having 60+ >packages. We would still want our versioned packages for the runtime, >but it should help to cut down on the number of packages without >having binary compatibility problems. You could then use the current >cygwin x11-xorg package names as "collection" stubs for the individual >ones. Just a thought.
Who are you talking to here exactly? We don't have a Cygwin/X maintainer so any suggestions or great ideas are guaranteed not to be implmenented. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/