Martin Bochnig wrote: >> Yes I was enquiring about objections from others >> here. >> If you have objections you mention it, which you >> have done >> anyway. So what is the problem with that ? >> I am building FOX while having only FOX itself on >> the build >> machine. All Nevada Xwindows packages were removed. >> > > > I didn't remove them. > I only renamed /usr/openwin to foo and made /usr/openwin a symlink pointing > to /usr/X11. > Plus I adjusted the symlinks in /usr/lib/. > What's the big deal with getting it self-hosted? A few lib.so.N symlinks, > adding missing libs to the system, proper build order. >
Since most OpenSolaris distros will only have FOX, one should be able to build the repository with only FOX installed. > [...] > That's right. And is compatible with my model. I only have a higher threshold > value before I am willing to make the *initial* commit. That's the only > difference. > BTW, when did you last push something into FOX? > I did not yet since I was tied up too much with work. Working on FOX is not my full day job. But then I have posted source earlier and posted diffs as well. > > >> Have you posted your diffs at all ? >> > > You obviously never visited my website: > http://www.martux.org/xorg/OLD/20070503__7.2.0/bin_pkgadd_packages/sparc-probe.patch > http://www.martux.org/xorg/OLD/20070503__7.2.0/src/ > > - > [DIR] 0__20070227/ 03-May-2007 15:54 - > [DIR] 1__20070410/ 03-May-2007 15:54 - > [DIR] 2__20070430moinakg__..> 03-May-2007 15:54 - > [DIR] 3__20070430moinakg__..> 03-May-2007 15:54 - > > So then you also never tested my binary packages on SPARC? > Only 3 IP addresses have downloaded the FOX1.0-SPARC tarball over the last 3 > days ... :-( > So you don't happen to be one of those 3 persons? > No time to do testing on SPARC for me now. I am only looking at getting things to work on x86. > [...] > > Sure, I had written about this. > At first I had considered to integrate some basic logic into the make > framework to apply patches depending on which ISA the build is run on/for. > But then I thought about it: Mr. Coopersmith would certainly have done so, if > he had wanted to, but he didn't. Probably for a good reason: Let's apply any > and every patch, whether on SPARC or on x86, but lets keep the patches > platform-clean by means of the conditional preprocessor directives. That's > why my SPARC-patches do not interfere with x86. > That's good. If you notice all I have done is to add modules to the build framework. Not much of source code change at all. > [...] > >> Please post your >> diffs first. I can hold back on merging my apps >> stuff but I do not >> understand what big problems it will cause. >> > > > It may produce many HUNKS (if mercurial works like diff/patch, no idea). > And one has to fix them one after another. > Plus, I have really done something for making the pkgdefs look better, while > there is still much work required. > Just automatically merging stuff would break this, depending on how much you > have extended yours (compared to the automatically generated ones from May). > > So okay. > I won't come into your way. > I won't sync in my stuff, if that's not wanted by Indiana. > It is most certainly wanted, but I want to first build and test your updated Xserver on x86. But please merge in stuff like open-src/apps. Do you have changes in apps ? Regards, Moinak.
