Modular X.org and the Unichrome forks.

[Hugo Mills]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 03:13:00PM +1100, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > For X.org
> >
> > For distributors,
> 
> > As for the projects themselves,
> 
> Now where abouts do the users come into this, how does a user who
> knows nothing other than there is a VIA chip in my board, decide who
> rules, and how stable that is v the other.. distributions still have
> to bless one over the other as they have to make a default, no matter
> what they do they aren't going to have a popup dialog explaining to
> the user the political minefield and why one is better than another..

   Speaking as a (highly technical) user, removing Unichrome support
is absolutely the *worst* thing you could do. Adding out-of-tree
components to X.org is an absolute nightmare, in my experience. I have
never managed to achieve it without a ground-up rebuild of X. On an
EPIA ME6000, this takes a *very* long time, and completely messes up
the package management on the machine. Having CLE266 hardware
acceleration support in the base X.org distribution will make life
immeasurably easier for me, and all of the other mere users of X and
Unichrome. Removing it (or reverting to a form without the MPEG2
acceleration support) is something that I would view (from a personal
viewpoint) as wilfully obstructive at best.

   Hugo.

-- 
=== Hugo Mills: hugo at ... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
  PGP key: 1C335860 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk
       --- We believe in free will because we have no choice. ---        
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20051222/82b5059d/attachment.pgp>