Re: Disbandment
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 10:49:12AM -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Ruth A. Kramer wrote: Here's what it says at www.xfree86.org: quote No More Core Team [30 December 2003] The XFree86 core team has voted to disband itself, effective 31 December 2003. The XFree86 Project and its active cutting-edge developers are all still very much alive and residing in our development forum. Comments about this can be made there; registration is not necessary. The last I looked, no one had made any comments there. Has anyone tried? (anonymous postings in slashdot the like are worthless) The main point is, i think, to clearly say that if the core team as been disbanded, this doesn't touch XFree86 per see, and it is more a internal reorganisation or something such, and doesn't change anything with out relation with the outside. That said, i perfectly understand that these issues are quite puzzling for outside people, who mostly know XFree86 only from using it, but nothing of the internal quarrels we had in the past. Friendly, Sven Luther ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Disbandment
Thomas Dickey wrote: On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Ruth A. Kramer wrote: Here's what it says at www.xfree86.org: The XFree86 core team has voted to disband itself, effective 31 December 2003. The XFree86 Project and its active cutting-edge developers are all still very much alive and residing in our development forum. Comments about this can be made there; registration is not necessary. The last I looked, no one had made any comments there. Has anyone tried? There were one or two that came through on the forum list after the original very confusing announcement was reported on Slashdot and other Linux news/blog sites. The revised announcement on the web page now is much better than the original one which gave no clue what this meant and almost implied the whole project was shutting down. It still doesn't really say what this means, just that it doesn't mean what everyone assumed it meant. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc.- Sun Software Group User Experience Engineering: G11N: X Window System ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Disbandment
Sven Luther wrote: That said, i perfectly understand that these issues are quite puzzling for outside people, who mostly know XFree86 only from using it, but nothing of the internal quarrels we had in the past. Sven, Or outsiders who knew (or thought they knew) a little about past internal quarrels but don't know what this signifies in terms of those quarrels. regards, Randy Kramer BTW: Thanks for your reply to my earlier post! ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Disbandment
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Sven Luther wrote: The XFree86 core team has voted to disband itself, effective 31 December 2003. The XFree86 Project and its active cutting-edge developers are all still very much alive and residing in our development forum. Comments about this can be made there; registration is not necessary. The main point is, i think, to clearly say that if the core team as been disbanded, this doesn't touch XFree86 per see, and it is more a internal reorganisation or something such, and doesn't change anything with out relation with the outside. But the webpage does state that the project is unaffected. And if no one starts a thread on forum to discuss the implications in depth, then I'd expect no more information than this. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Disbandment
On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 09:11:14PM -0500, Ruth A. Kramer wrote: Sven Luther wrote: That said, i perfectly understand that these issues are quite puzzling for outside people, who mostly know XFree86 only from using it, but nothing of the internal quarrels we had in the past. Sven, Or outsiders who knew (or thought they knew) a little about past internal quarrels but don't know what this signifies in terms of those quarrels. It is part of a restructuring that has moved XFree86 technical and development discussions into a more open environment. That started early in 2003 when this list was made into a public list. The core team was the only remaining closed technical/development group. With its disbanding, all of the technical/development discussions happen here or on one of the other public XFree86 lists. In the future, as the need arises, we may use a taskforce model to bring together concentrated groups of developers to drive specific tasks forward. The old technical core team model, with its fairly static composition, did not work well for this sort of thing. A good example is that what was effectively the taskforce for the design phase of XFree86 4.0 in 1997-1999 had quite a different makeup from the then core team. David -- David Dawes developer/release engineer The XFree86 Project www.XFree86.org/~dawes ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Disbandment
I think David's explanation below is very good. It would help stem the tide of confused emails to add almost exactly this wording to the notice on the front page of XFree86.Org. --Torrey At 1:59 PM -0500 1/14/04, David Dawes wrote: On Tue, Jan 13, 2004 at 09:11:14PM -0500, Ruth A. Kramer wrote: Sven Luther wrote: That said, i perfectly understand that these issues are quite puzzling for outside people, who mostly know XFree86 only from using it, but nothing of the internal quarrels we had in the past. Sven, Or outsiders who knew (or thought they knew) a little about past internal quarrels but don't know what this signifies in terms of those quarrels. It is part of a restructuring that has moved XFree86 technical and development discussions into a more open environment. That started early in 2003 when this list was made into a public list. The core team was the only remaining closed technical/development group. With its disbanding, all of the technical/development discussions happen here or on one of the other public XFree86 lists. In the future, as the need arises, we may use a taskforce model to bring together concentrated groups of developers to drive specific tasks forward. The old technical core team model, with its fairly static composition, did not work well for this sort of thing. A good example is that what was effectively the taskforce for the design phase of XFree86 4.0 in 1997-1999 had quite a different makeup from the then core team. David -- David Dawes developer/release engineer The XFree86 Project www.XFree86.org/~dawes ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Untrusted XSecurity connection handling in X applications
Hi, I'd like to focus attention of application developpers on one of the X server feature that will become more used in the near future: the XSecurity extension which create the possibility of using 'xauth generate' to dynamically create xauth cookies. By default clients connecting with these cookies will be 'untrusted' by the X server, meaning that it will apply a number of restrictions which are described in xc/doc/hardcopy/Xext/security.PS.gz in the source code - I've also made a PDF available as http://www.xfree86.org/~herrb/security.pdf. Among those restrictions, the one of interest is the property security which is controlled by /etc/X11/XServer/SecurityPolicy. The default policy included in the sample implementation and in XFree86 is quite restrictive and causes a lot of X applications to get Bad Access errors when run as 'unsecure'. But many applications (it looks to me that it's especially true for GTK applications like xmms or gmplayer, but it's in no way GTK specific) don't have a decent X protocol error handler and they will abort ungracefully in this case. So this is a Heads Up message for application developpers, to add a correct X protocol errors handler to their applications and to make this handler aware of the BadAccess errors that untrusted clients may get. Thanks for listening. Matthieu ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: How can we XGI share our Linux 2D driver with the open source community? Thanx
Le 12.01.2004 08:39:22, Yukun Chen a crit: Hi All I am a developer from XGI Technology which is a new company stem from graphic dpt. of Trident and graphic dpt. of Sis. Now we want to share our linux 2D driver with open source community. Then what should we do? Pls give some advice or suggestions. Thanx a lot. Bst.,rgds Does your driver has good support of Xv and XvMC? That would be nice as a lot of people are using these to build home-theater PCs (actually until now only nVidia binary drivers are supporting XvMC, and perhaps Gatos for ATI cards). Bye Manu ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Xserver/GL/glx/g_render.c changes?
In building the top of the tree on Mac OS X 10.2 I have run into troubles linking the GLX support in Xserver/GL. The problem is that native OpenGL in Mac OS X 10.2 does not include glActiveStencilFaceEXT() and glWindowPos3fARB(), which have been added to g_render.c and g_renderswap.c since 4.3.0. On Mac OS X 10.3 things build fine since these calls are available. g_render.c includes the comment: /* DO NOT EDIT - THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED */ I can build server side GLX successfully if I just #ifdef the offending calls out on Mac OS X 10.2. or #define them to no-ops. Is this likely to cause problems? How is g_render.c automatically generated? What is the best way to conditionally remove support for these two functions? --Torrey ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: via driver SEGVs on FreeBSD
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 06:54:04PM -0500, James Harris wrote: Hi, The CVS version of XFree SEGVs on FreeBSD-4.8 and DragonFly-CURRENT on my Asus A7V8X-VM (VIA KM400 using on board video). This happens after switching to a graphics mode but before the cross hatching. Also, I'm using a old monitor that doesn't do DDC. It seems (even with the patched gdb for loadable modules and building with -g, I couldn't get symbol names in modules) the crash happens on line 8184 in via_bios.c (in VIAFindModeUseBIOSTable()): pBIOSInfo-UserSetting-DefaultSetting = FALSE; Thing is, I don't see where UserSetting is ever allocated! The attached patch allocates it in VIAGetRec() in via_driver.c. Hmm, that was supposed to be fixed, but you're right -- it isn't. I'll commit that fix, plus add a line to free it in VIAFreeRec(). Thanks. David -- David Dawes developer/release engineer The XFree86 Project www.XFree86.org/~dawes ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
RE: How can we XGI share our Linux 2D driver with the open source community? Thanx
The i810 driver in xfree86 supports XvMC and the savage driver from S3/VIA supports it although that code has not yet been integrated into an xfree86 release. Alex --- Yukun Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Until now, we support Xv but not XvMC. Then , any idea for support it? Thanx -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of manu Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 12:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: How can we XGI share our Linux 2D driver with the open source community? Thanx Le 12.01.2004 08:39:22, Yukun Chen a écrit : Hi All I am a developer from XGI Technology which is a new company stem from graphic dpt. of Trident and graphic dpt. of Sis. Now we want to share our linux 2D driver with open source community. Then what should we do? Pls give some advice or suggestions. Thanx a lot. Bst.,rgds Does your driver has good support of Xv and XvMC? That would be nice as a lot of people are using these to build home-theater PCs (actually until now only nVidia binary drivers are supporting XvMC, and perhaps Gatos for ATI cards). Bye Manu ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the Signing Bonus Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
redhat-config-xfree86
Hello all, I have a problem during run redhat-config-xfree86 under Xwindow : monitor will be closed (include sync). But run it normally under text console mode. I think thatmay be brought by driver , because it's ok under Xwindow if using vesa driver. I foundexec redhat-config-xfree86will run "python2.2 xconf.py" and monitor will closed in "cv = FX86HardwareState(xconf)" this step May someone know Which XFree86 functions will be called by FX86HardwareState(xconf).Or Wheremay I find hints? Thanks Harry
Re: Xserver/GL/glx/g_render.c changes?
Torrey Lyons wrote: In building the top of the tree on Mac OS X 10.2 I have run into troubles linking the GLX support in Xserver/GL. The problem is that native OpenGL in Mac OS X 10.2 does not include glActiveStencilFaceEXT() and glWindowPos3fARB(), which have been added to g_render.c and g_renderswap.c since 4.3.0. On Mac OS X 10.3 things build fine since these calls are available. g_render.c includes the comment: /* DO NOT EDIT - THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED */ I can build server side GLX successfully if I just #ifdef the offending calls out on Mac OS X 10.2. or #define them to no-ops. Is this likely to cause problems? How is g_render.c automatically generated? What is the best way to conditionally remove support for these two functions? It's not. This code was donated by SGI, and I suspect that at SGI it is automatically generated. However, in XFree86 it is not. I'm in the process of making some changes to this file in DRI CVS. I'll drop a line to this list when I'm done so that you can tell me which routines break on the Mac, and what ifdef needs to be put around them. ___ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
