> Dear NetBSD-users, > for many years, X11/Xorg provided the basis for graphical user > interfaces on Unix-like systems; so on NetBSD. It was therefore always a > relief for me to be able to install it ready for use as part of the base > system.
> In the meantime there is also X11/Xorg in pkgsrc and I wonder what > reasons - in particular on the amd64 platform - speak for one or the > other approach. I ask especially because I recently had some problems > with both approaches. > The pkgsrc version led to segmentation faults on my Thinkpad X220 with > Intel graphics, while the version from NetBSD worked without any problems. > On the other hand, the xentools411 from the pkgsrc could not be built > with the version from NetBSD due to an unfulfilled dependency on Mesa, > while with Xorg from pkgsrc there was no problem. > I don't want to see this as a rating - I didn't put a lot of energy into > analyzing these problems and I think they can be solved or at least > worked around. Nevertheless, I would be interested to know which route > is the recommended one at the moment or where it is worth putting more > energy into it. > Kind regards > Matthias My first thought is when updating is necessary with pkg_rolling-replace or other means, updating modular-xorg can make a big mess. Updating Xorg as part of the base system is much easier, but then there is the disadvantage that a bug in the X source can ruin the whole NetBSD build. from Thierry Laronde : > There is one very good incentive for X11 provided with the system: it > can use the compilation and thus the cross-compilation framework to be > built. This is clearly a bonus when one is using architectures for which > a cross-compilation does save a lot of time. > This is, at least for me, one very good reason to have X11 back in the > sources. A NetBSD system is a consistent system that, already "as is", > can provide the means to do real work (I know that I indeed add only my > own softwares on top of it---well: I add sendmail and procmail too, but > they do cross-compile without ado...). > This will not answer "the" question but the side question: why in the > sources too. Ability to cross-compile is another factor favoring native Xorg over modular (pkgsrc) Xorg. It would be interesting to see what others say. I have one installation where I have modular Xorg, some packages but nothing really big: question is how to get rid of the modular Xorg part before or after updating with native X. I could mv /usr/pkg to /usr/pkg-old and /var/db/pkg to /var/db/pkg-old, and install some non-X packages back from /usr/pkg-old to serve as a start. I would also have to remember to change X11_TYPE from modular to native in /etc/mk.conf . Tom
