Xorg packaging

Luciano Montanaro mikelima at gmail.com
Wed Apr 4 01:46:09 PDT 2007

On venerdì 30 marzo 2007, Lubos Lunak wrote:

>  What I especially don't get is why there are all those 10k libX*.so
> libraries like libXdamage.so that all could be simply included in
> libXext. They're so awfully small that this is IMHO modularization taken
> a bit too far and I fail to see any advantage in this that'd be worth all
> the overhead.

Couldn't libxcb help here? If I understand correctly, it is meant as a 
lower-level replacement for libX11. Does it provide access to X11 
extensions too? In this case, porting toolkits (Qt, Gtk) to xcb instead of 
relying on libX11 and co. would be a net win.


More information about the xorg mailing list