Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
Dear Branden, I really don't think it's too bad a decision. 4.1.0 is the stablest release we've had in the ``N'' branch (3.9.*, 4.*); of the versions of XFree86 that I'm familiar with, I think only 3.3.6 comes anywhere close in terms of stability. While there is a significant amount of new functionality in 4.2.0, much of that is experimental, and therefore not significant for people who're not willing to install from unstable. As to people who need support for newer hardware -- well, tough, let them use the VESA driver. Juliusz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
Seems that 4.1.0-16 fixed at last the old problem with garbage-on-screen in kicker and in nedit scrollbars on r128 card. Great work ! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What the fuck is going on! When in this insane world did Branden become > the polite well mannered one, and I become the asshole! Uh oh, if we elect Branden DPL, is he going to switch back? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
On Tue 16 Apr 2002 13:01, Branden Robinson wrote: > A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a > message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought > about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the > time, didn't see a need. > > Thanks to that recent thread, now I see a need. :) > > Well, I myself am not exactly thrilled that woody won't have 4.2 in > it, but: > Surely you shouldn't let something like that stop you, I would expect with your expertise and skills, you would have had X6.5 packaged and retroactively installed into Hamm by now ;-p Seriously, though. As someone who stumbled his way through 'make world' on his bastardized Potato/woody/sid/whatever box, fetching and re-configuring various build requirements and trying to figure out just how the config files and such should be so I could play with my 'new' GVX1 board, only to find that the binaries from XFree86 can install rather cleanly, at least on my daughter's Progeny/woody system so she can enjoy Creatures, Internet Edition. Then to find out that 4.2.0 STILL does not provide 3D accelerated graphic on my GVX1 and am now playing with the Accellerated-X Demo server so I can play with such things like, tuxracer, racer and stereoscopic programming of N-Demensional objects. . . Installing X4.2.0 on a Debian system is a 'rather' trival task, making personal .deb's requires a bit more reading than I'm willing to do, but shouldn't be too hard for most Debian hackers but as Branden said, making Debian release-quality .deb's is a whole other kettle of fish. If you really _need_ 4.2.0, it's rather easy to install yourself. Branden has quite a bit of other things to worry about that just how to install on i386, though. Let him work on the quality he's so renowned for and jsut install what you need for yourself. Just my 1.54 Euro's worth. John Gay -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
Dear Branden, in the spirit of a recent email reminding us of this: Thank you. i am myself a recipient of a lot of "hate mail" and questions on why woody "sucks" simply because i've converted a *very large* number of people to debian. thanks you for writing to slashdot and for the email you just posted, maybe it will make people realize what they are dealing with. P4 / GeForce people (what a wonderful stereotype) generally don't even know what debian is and are very surprised to hear me say that debian's not linux at all, linux is merely the most popular form of debian. i am rambling, but i guess i have a point. cutting-edge or not, we should all realize that debian's more than just another distro. for me, it's a lifesaver. we should accept that our goal is debian, not competing with the other distros. let them redhat and suse folks worry about the rich-daddy-kids with their machines too fast for their brains and graphics cards that can render about 2^22 more colours than the human eye can distinguish. and most important of all, let us concentrate on our distro and simply not care too much on what others bitch. after all, part of debian's charm is that we -devels are all in love with it ;^>. anyway, i better stop, it's way too late, and i am just writing as i think. but this is to all of us: KEEP IT UP, THANK YOU! debian/rules -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck "men always want to be a woman's first love. women have a more subtle instinct: what they like is to be a man's last romance." -- oscar wilde msg03532/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:01:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a > message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought > about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the > time, didn't see a need. > > Thanks to that recent thread, now I see a need. :) What the fuck is going on! When in this insane world did Branden become the polite well mannered one, and I become the asshole! -- Debian - http://www.debian.org/ Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/ Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ Deqo - http://www.deqo.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
begin Branden Robinson quotation: > A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a > message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought > about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the > time, didn't see a need. > > Thanks to that recent thread, now I see a need. :) [snip] Branden, as one Debian user, I would like to thank you for the tremendous job you do on the X packages. Debian's X has worked flawlessly on my machines. Unlike many less-complex packages, I have never installed a new X package and found it fundamentally broken. (And this is running Sid, mind you, so I'm not getting the benefit of two weeks of other users' testing.) I await 4.2 patiently. I don't want to see it until you feel it's ready, and as long as there are 4.1 issues to deal with for Woody, obviously that should be your focus. > I'll also add that some of my time (some of it paid for by my employer) > has being going towards trying to solve a problem that people have been > complaining about even more loudly -- and for a greater duration -- than > the absence of XFree86 4.2 Debian packages: Debian's installer. > > Some people just don't like Debian's existing text-mode installer, no > matter how flexible it is. They want a GUI installer, darn it. > Progeny's version of Debian got pretty positive reviews, and several > people said Progeny "solved" the "problem" with Debian's installer. If we get a nice GUI installer, that's great, but it's JUST PLAIN STUPID for people to claim that there is anything wrong with a text-mode one. I've installed Potato several times (usually dist-upgrading to Sid almost immediately thereafter). I _like_ that installer. It may not be as pretty as Red Hat's, but it's more than adequate, and it makes sense to me that an OS installer should make minimal demands on the system. Still, as I said, a GUI installer's fine with me as long as it works well, so I look forward to seeing the fruits of your labors in Woody+1. I'll take a look at your work-in-progress next time I do an install. Craig msg03530/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
* Sven ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > That said, what are your planes for woody+1 ? Just to talk about things I've no clue about I'll reply to this. My personal thoughts are that woody+1 will take a while and by then there will be more X releases than 4.3. Even so though, if the PCI Domain stuff makes it into 4.3 I would think that'd be the next stop. Stephen msg03529/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:01:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a > message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought > about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the > time, didn't see a need. Branden, nice email! You're doing amazing work! Thank you! Julian -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London website: http://www.maths.qmul.ac.uk/~jdg/ Debian GNU/Linux Developer, see: http://people.debian.org/~jdg/ Visit http://www.thehungersite.com/ to help feed the hungry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 07:01:06AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a > message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought > about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the > time, didn't see a need. Branden, ... I perfectly understand why 4.1 is not in woody, altough it is a shame, but i guess the delaying of the woody release did play a role in this (if we had released woody 6 month ago, like initialy planed, this would not have been a problem). That said, what are your planes for woody+1 ? Will you be trying to bring 4.2 to be an acceptable package before you work on 4.3, or will you work directly with 4.3, which accordying to XFree86 schedule will be released RSN (well they have a 6 month release cycle, which in truth end being around 8 month, i think). But again, this is something which will be efficient only if the woody+1 release will not be delayed as much. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why XFree86 4.2 Isn't in Woody
A couple of people on a recent thread in debian-devel linked to a message I recently posted on Slashdot on this subject. I had thought about posting this information to Debian's lists as well, but at the time, didn't see a need. Thanks to that recent thread, now I see a need. :) Well, I myself am not exactly thrilled that woody won't have 4.2 in it, but: As you said, I've been busy with getting 4.1.x stable. For Debian, this means much more than it does for some vendors. In woody, we support 11 architectures: alpha, arm, hppa, ia64, i386, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, and sparc. For how many of these machine architectures do Slackware, Mandrake, or Red Hat have 4.1.x, let alone 4.2, available? XFree86 themselves don't test or prepare distribution tarballs for several of these architectures. Debian is the de facto portability laboratory for XFree86 on Linux. Sure, I'll grant you that a lot of people, the kinds with the overclocked Pentium 4's and the latest GeForce card, really don't care about portability, or supporting architectures they've never heard of. But portability is important to me and it's important to Debian. I refuse to treat non-i386 users like second-class citizens. Those who want CVS HEAD, are best advised to learn how to check it out and type "make World". I'm sure that Pentium 4 overlocked to 3 GHz will compile the X source tree pretty quickly. :-) The single most amazing thing about all the hate mail I've received for not having 4.2 Debian packages ready -- aside from the fact that I started receiving it about two days after it was tagged upstream -- is that people seem to be laboring under the delusion that I have some kind of secret tools locked away in a vault, and that I am the only person who has the power to create packages. Sure, I'm probably better at doing XFree86 debs than most people, since I've been doing it for so long, but there's no great secret. I'm sure that with half an hour of manpage reading, a reasonably intelligent person can learn everything he needs to produce XFree86 4.2 debs for himself that will work well enough to satisfy his impatient self. Hey, I like to see the latest and greatest of everything, too -- that's why I use apt-listchanges, but I don't go haranguing the Debian developers to package up a new upstream version when I can clearly tell that they're working on other things for the project. On a related note, 4.2 just plain won't work on some of Debian's supported machines because we need the PCI Domain support, which is currently a branch in XFree86 CVS and did not make it into the 4.2 release. So for us, releasing 4.2 doesn't just mean releasing 4.2. It means releasing 4.2 plus some very large patches in very critical parts of the server code. You really, really want a good long opportunity to shake that sort of thing out, since Debian's 4.2 may not behave exactly as XFree86's 4.2 does. I don't just package the thing tagged xf-4_2_0 and leave it at that. I track hotfixes commited both to the latest release's branch and to HEAD, and incorporate them into Debian's packages if they work and if they make the packages better from a quality standpoint. Ask ATI video card users about 4.2.0 and "composite sync" sometime. (This isn't to dog the XFree86 Project. Software has bugs. Software releases with bugs. But, knowing about the default composite sync issue which affects so many users, it would be irresponsible of me to ignore it.) I didn't expect it to take until May for woody to release. Back in January, I felt sure that there was no way Anthony Towns would accept 4.2 into woody; when I sounded him out at the time about it he sounded kind of skeptical. Needless to say, the longer it takes woody to release, the worse a decision this is, but I don't have control over the release process. (Strictly speaking, Anthony doesn't either -- meaning, he can declare a release, sure, but he can't force people at gunpoint to fix the remaining release critical bugs. And Debian's philosophy has been to release when "it's ready", not when some marketroid tells us to, and thus just live with whatever whopper bugs happen to be in the release that day.) So, that's why XFree86 4.2 isn't in woody. I'll also add that some of my time (some of it paid for by my employer) has being going towards trying to solve a problem that people have been complaining about even more loudly -- and for a greater duration -- than the absence of XFree86 4.2 Debian packages: Debian's installer. Some people just don't like Debian's existing text-mode installer, no matter how flexible it is. They want a GUI installer, darn it. Prog
