Further notes on 7.4
dbn.lists at gmail.com
Mon Jun 30 16:11:52 PDT 2008
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 03:22:25PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Adam Jackson <ajax at nwnk.net> wrote:
>> > Note that almost all of the graphics demos and core font utilities are
>> > gone in that list. Yes, this is intentional. xeyes is not a critical
>> > component of the modern desktop. Run them if you want, but they're not
>> > part of the core release anymore.
>> Just a couple thoughts looking over the pruned list. I'm not
>> necessarily pushing for these to go back in, but just considering both
>> sides of the coin.
>> - twm/xdm: Certainly legacy in the window/display manager world, but
>> it seems strange to install X without one of each. Also, the default
>> xinitrc runs twm, xclock and xterm, none of which would be available
>> with the core X installation.
> I think all the reasons I raised in the core fonts mail still apply
> here. People bootstrapping from scratch have a hard life as it is, so I
> think it makes sense to ease the load on our core audience of people
> building on existing distributions, and just include one more
> documentation point for people who already have to follow a lot of very
> sketchy documentation.
Yeah, I suppose that you're mostly right about who the people are who
are building X and that they can keep using the X apps on their
distro. What I'd like to see, though, is a clear data point that says
"here are the tarballs for the core X installation, but you can get
all the extra/legacy/whatever stuff here (link to
releases/individual)". It sucks when something changes and the only
notice is a message buried in mailing list archives.
>> - makedepend: The mesa build depends on this, so you can't get through
>> a standard X build without it.
> Can Mesa package this then, preferably with the rest of its build system
> (i.e. in its tarball)? All yours, krh's and George's good work into
> uncoupling our build systems thus far has been brilliant, thanks. :)
If makedepend was a single C file, I'd feel more comfortable
shoehorning it into mesa. But, you can certainly make GCC do the exact
same thing with -M -MF. I don't know about other compilers, though,
which is the hangup.
More information about the xorg