Current tinderbox regression (xhost)

[Paulo César Pereira de Andrade]

Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi,

  Hi,

>>   I hope this is not a final decision. And would hope for a
>> more formal message, other then a notification in IRC while
>> I am marked as away, and due to no response in 30 minutes
>> have my commit rights removed.
>
> Sorry, it wasn't due to no response to Peter's thing, it was in fact
> mostly separate and prompted by a few other things.

  I was somewhat pissed because I was believing I was doing
the right thing, that would be to not post very trivial patches
to the list to avoid unnecessary noise. And mainly because it
was clearly a single person taking a (well, don't know the
correct english word, lets try) "instinctive" decision; lifes
are lost due to these kinds of reactions...
  The other reason "I have been pissed" for quite some time,
is that I believe I am being a victim of some misunderstanding
or something, maybe because I am extremely shy :-) Talk to
anybody that knows me personally, I talk only the minimum
necessary :-) And maybe someone thought I am being "evil",
but yes, I am still an advocate of a GPL'ed "X Window System"

>>   The problem in xf86-input-evdev was that I only tested
>> the "make distcheck correction" using --prefix=/usr. I don't
>> disagree that for this special case, given that xf86-input-evdev
>> is actively maintained by you and Peter, it would have been
>> better to first post the "janitor" patch to the list for
>> comments and approval.

  Yes, in like over 100 packages of trivial patches, I committed
a mistake, that still passed my test condition (and would work for
any build using /usr is prefix).

>>   I even added a comment of what would be a more proper solution
>> (exactly what Dan Nicholson said in another email), but it still
>> is not what I believe is the proper solution to handle pkg-config
>> variables specifying directories (unfortunately I did not implement
>> that because the simpler, but wrong solution, worked in my test
>> case).
>>
>>   I avoided making the "make distcheck" corrections in a batch
>> so that if any problems arised, it would be noticed earlier.
>> And posting a huge amount of frequently one liners, trivial
>> patches, would just add gratuitous noise to the list.
>>
>>   Well, I just hope this is not the final response for voluntary
>> work on correcting make distcheck and other "trivial" problems
>> in the xorg packages.
>
> Your fd.o account should continue to work (please let me know if not)
> and I've added you as an ACL into the xedit repository.  Please
> continue to work, but send your patches to the list first or keep them
> in your own repository before pushing for review.

  Thanks. I just verified, and git pull works. But now it is too late
(I am a bad joker, and my jokes aren't fun, you can hate me for that
also :-)

  But seriously, today I did something I wanted to do for almost
one year (after my around 4 years away from X). I checked out
XFree86 4.8.0, and "ported" it to current Mandriva Linux, and was
finishing the process of building alternate packages for the
adventurous (they may be useful on things like custom OEMS), but,
not surprisingly, having binaries linked with Xorg libraries working
with XFree86 ones, or vice versa, may be a significantly hard task...

> Cheers,
> Daniel

Paulo