Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
David O'Brien wrote: On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 04:05:27PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). isn't it possible to provide both versions and left the user to choice between both w/ a information box relating problems found in the one or the other ? There are issues for the pre-compiled packages due to differences between the two versions of XFree86. what kind of issues ? I'm using both XFree86-4 and ports in package form (pre-compiled stuffs) w/o any problems. Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 08:56:08AM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: what kind of issues ? I'm using both XFree86-4 and ports in package form (pre-compiled stuffs) w/o any problems. Please RTF /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk and look at what XFREE86_VERSION does. -- -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). isn't it possible to provide both versions and left the user to choice between both w/ a information box relating problems found in the one or the other ? Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 04:05:27PM +0200, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: David O'Brien wrote: On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). isn't it possible to provide both versions and left the user to choice between both w/ a information box relating problems found in the one or the other ? There are issues for the pre-compiled packages due to differences between the two versions of XFree86. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Daniel O'Connor writes: : X3 also supports more of the hardware out there than X4. X3 supports more OLDER hardware, while X4 supports some newer hardware better. X -configure is great when it works, but sucks otherwise. I've had both cases happen.. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: :- It's a pitty you can't pick either :) :- There are, of course, several issue, the most difficult is the fact :- that packages are built against XFree 3.3.6 and pkg_add can't 'adjust' :- that during install :( Seconded. We are in a straddling situation where some cards are better supported by 4.0 and other by 3.x. I've played with manually symlinking the stuff in /var/db, but I'd hardly recommend that as a general solution. I know it is slimy, but couldn't there be a dummy port just called XFree86 that is what most other ports depend on? The minority of ports that actually care what version of X is installed could always use the version-specific names... -- Robert Withrow -- (+1 978 288 8256, ESN 248) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Thus spake Robert Withrow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I know it is slimy, but couldn't there be a dummy port just called XFree86 that is what most other ports depend on? The minority of ports that actually care what version of X is installed could always use the version-specific names... Would be nice if we had a package system that lets you just install - let me call them - features, such as a XFree86 feature, other ports could depend on. Multiple packages could supply this feature then and ports could also say if they depend on a specific version. Alex, hiding in a dark corner. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
* Alexander Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010918 15:07]: Thus spake Robert Withrow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I know it is slimy, but couldn't there be a dummy port just called XFree86 that is what most other ports depend on? The minority of ports that actually care what version of X is installed could always use the version-specific names... Would be nice if we had a package system that lets you just install - let me call them - features, such as a XFree86 feature, other ports could depend on. Multiple packages could supply this feature then and ports could also say if they depend on a specific version. Alex, hiding in a dark corner. Isn't this what XFREE86_VERSION does? -- Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction. Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns :: To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 18-Sep-2001 Alexander Langer wrote: Thus spake Robert Withrow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I know it is slimy, but couldn't there be a dummy port just called XFree86 that is what most other ports depend on? The minority of ports that actually care what version of X is installed could always use the version-specific names... Would be nice if we had a package system that lets you just install - let me call them - features, such as a XFree86 feature, other ports could depend on. Multiple packages could supply this feature then and ports could also say if they depend on a specific version. Yes, I suspect the answer is along the lines of 'yes that's coming' :) The previous suggestion (have a generic XFree86 port) is a) hacky, but b) workable in the current package framework I suspect.. Probably have to trap a port guru and subject them to torture before it got implemented though ;) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Thus spake Rasputin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Isn't this what XFREE86_VERSION does? Nope, this is a build-time option. I can't remember a commit to the pkg tools that check for XFREE86_VERSION. Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Thus spake Daniel O'Connor ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Yes, I suspect the answer is along the lines of 'yes that's coming' :) :-) The previous suggestion (have a generic XFree86 port) is a) hacky, but b) workable in the current package framework I suspect.. Yes, would be a nice workaround. I don't use packages, though :) Alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
My interest in a later version of XFree86 is that in trying to install FreeBSD-Current on my Dell Insperion 4000e Laptop, the ATI Rage 128 3D graphics accelerator used is not supported at all under XFree86 3.3.6. So I am forced to upgrade to a later version of XFree86 to get 'X' to work at all Can someone outline the easiest way to do that given how things are in the FreeBSD-4.3 Release?? Thanks in Advance, Glenn G. Alexander Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thus spake Robert Withrow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I know it is slimy, but couldn't there be a dummy port just called XFree86 that is what most other ports depend on? The minority of ports that actually care what version of X is installed could always use the version-specific names... Would be nice if we had a package system that lets you just install - let me call them - features, such as a XFree86 feature, other ports could depend on. Multiple packages could supply this feature then and ports could also say if they depend on a specific version. Alex, hiding in a dark corner. ___ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:48:11PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: No, 3.3.6. There is no such thing as 3.3.7 (at least not according to www.xfree86.org) and even if there were, enough version-number specifics are encoded into sysinstall that I would had to have been told at least a week or two ago if any such version number bump were contemplated. :) Which reminds me ... shouldn't sysinstall read this kind of information from the distribution area instead of hard-coding it within sysinstall itself? This would require make release to generate some metadata about the release area, but then other installers would have easy access to what's available for installation as well, and you wouldn't have to modify sysinstall so much when things change. -Brian -- Brian Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
This is only one of many different areas in which sysinstall is insufficiently dynamic. Patches, as always, are cheerfully accepted. :) - Jordan On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:48:11PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: No, 3.3.6. There is no such thing as 3.3.7 (at least not according to www.xfree86.org) and even if there were, enough version-number specifics are encoded into sysinstall that I would had to have been told at least a week or two ago if any such version number bump were contemplated. :) Which reminds me ... shouldn't sysinstall read this kind of information from the distribution area instead of hard-coding it within sysinstall itself? This would require make release to generate some metadata about the release area, but then other installers would have easy access to what's available for installation as well, and you wouldn't have to modify sysinstall so much when things change. -Brian -- Brian Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Considering it, yes. But only considering. - Jordan On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 18-Sep-2001 Alexander Langer wrote: The previous suggestion (have a generic XFree86 port) is a) hacky, but b) workable in the current package framework I suspect.. Yes, would be a nice workaround. I don't use packages, though :) I'm forced not to if I'm using a machine which needs X4.. Usually for a fresh install I use packages since it gets a working machine quicker :) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
I'm confused why Open and NetBSD both have XF4 installed, while we can't. why! David Xu - Original Message - From: Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Robert Withrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Withrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Jordan Hubbard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4 On 18-Sep-2001 Alexander Langer wrote: The previous suggestion (have a generic XFree86 port) is a) hacky, but b) workable in the current package framework I suspect.. Yes, would be a nice workaround. I don't use packages, though :) I'm forced not to if I'm using a machine which needs X4.. Usually for a fresh install I use packages since it gets a working machine quicker :) --- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 18-Sep-2001 glenn gombert wrote: My interest in a later version of XFree86 is that in trying to install FreeBSD-Current on my Dell Insperion 4000e Laptop, the ATI Rage 128 3D graphics accelerator used is not supported at all under XFree86 3.3.6. So I am forced to upgrade to a later version of XFree86 to get 'X' to work at all Can someone outline the easiest way to do that given how things are in the FreeBSD-4.3 Release?? Install the base OS, then build X from ports, or fetch the X4 package. Then start building packages that require X.. (Adding packages will fail because they all want X3, so you have to use ports) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 19-Sep-2001 David Xu wrote: I'm confused why Open and NetBSD both have XF4 installed, while we can't. why! Because X4 sucks to configure. (X -configure is neat but still not very friendly) X3 has a nice point and drool interface. X3 also supports more of the hardware out there than X4. --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Nobody ever said we couldn't. The word you're looking for is won't and if you want to know why, search the mailing list archives because it's all been discussed before and there's no point in going over old ground. - Jordan From: David Xu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4 Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:48:14 +0800 I'm confused why Open and NetBSD both have XF4 installed, while we can't. why! David Xu - Original Message - From: Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Alexander Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Robert Withrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Robert Withrow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Jordan Hubbard [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4 On 18-Sep-2001 Alexander Langer wrote: The previous suggestion (have a generic XFree86 port) is a) hacky, but b) workable in the current package framework I suspect.. Yes, would be a nice workaround. I don't use packages, though :) I'm forced not to if I'm using a machine which needs X4.. Usually for a fresh install I use packages since it gets a working machine quicker :) --- To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
* Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 14:57:22 -0700 * From: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] * On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 05:42:23PM -0700, Jordan Hubbard wrote: * We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen What do you mean by support footprint? If you mean graphic cards, all we need to do is to provide XF3 servers in addition to the XF4 bits. * a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully * by 4.5. * * Are you really considering using XFree86 4.x in FreeBSD-4.5? * When I asked you about this in the past, you had said you wanted to keep * the same X in RELENG_4 (presumable to not rock the boat mid-branch). Given that FreeBSD 5.0 is pushed back a year, I think you should seriously reconsider that position... Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:45:36PM -0700, glenn gombert wrote: Does anyone know what version of XFree86 that is going to be released with FreeBSD 4.4 this weekend?? 3.3.7. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
Does anyone know what version of XFree86 that is going to be released with FreeBSD 4.4 this weekend?? 3.3.6. We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
No, 3.3.6. There is no such thing as 3.3.7 (at least not according to www.xfree86.org) and even if there were, enough version-number specifics are encoded into sysinstall that I would had to have been told at least a week or two ago if any such version number bump were contemplated. :) - Jordan On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:45:36PM -0700, glenn gombert wrote: Does anyone know what version of XFree86 that is going to be released with FreeBSD 4.4 this weekend?? 3.3.7. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 18-Sep-01 Jordan Hubbard wrote: No, 3.3.6. There is no such thing as 3.3.7 (at least not according to www.xfree86.org) and even if there were, enough version-number specifics are encoded into sysinstall that I would had to have been told at least a week or two ago if any such version number bump were contemplated. :) If you look in the release notes from the big 3.3.6a patch, it does call itself 3.3.7. However, the port still calls it 3.3.6. *shrug* - Jordan On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:45:36PM -0700, glenn gombert wrote: Does anyone know what version of XFree86 that is going to be released with FreeBSD 4.4 this weekend?? 3.3.7. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message -- John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc Power Users Use the Power to Serve! - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
Re: Version of XFree86 in FreeBSD Release 4.4
On 18-Sep-2001 Jordan Hubbard wrote: Does anyone know what version of XFree86 that is going to be released with FreeBSD 4.4 this weekend?? 3.3.6. We're still waiting for 4.0's support footprint to widen a bit more before subjecting people to it by default. Hopefully by 4.5. Dons asbestos suite It's a pitty you can't pick either :) There are, of course, several issue, the most difficult is the fact that packages are built against XFree 3.3.6 and pkg_add can't 'adjust' that during install :( flee --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from. -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe freebsd-hackers in the body of the message
