On 10 March 2017 at 16:32, Adam Jackson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 17:44 +0000, Jon Turney wrote: >> On 06/03/2017 22:20, Adam Jackson wrote: >> > On Mon, 2017-03-06 at 18:23 +0000, Jon Turney wrote: >> > >> > > Unfortunately, one of the possible definitions of _X_EXPORT in >> > > Xfuncproto.h is empty, in which case, this leaves us with nothing in >> > > sdksyms.c >> > >> > Though this be true, I'm not sure how it can matter. We only build >> > xfree86 on systems where _X_EXPORT expands to something non-empty. And >> >> It has been possible to build an xfree86 server for Cygwin since this >> [1] patchset. >> >> This might even turn out to be useful, if the idea of removing Xephyr, >> Xnest and Xvfb servers [2], to be replaced by invoking the Xorg server >> with the xf86-video-dummy or xf86-video-nested drivers, ever happens. > > I neither expect nor want this to happen. dummy might have some minor > utility, but the nested driver I think is a mistake, and I would not > consider its availability as a reason to drop Xnest or Xephyr. > Pardon the silly question, but going through the discussions did now help much. Do we have a list of features/bugs for/against each suggestion ?
I mean if there is somethings clearly defined, divide and conquer is the way. Atm everything seems quite magical, unless one has extensive prior experience with the DDXen and respective drivers. -Emil _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
