Re: xorg vs. xlibs/xserver/xapps?
On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 05:35:52PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: To switch to a technical question What are the differences between XOrg's monolithic tree and freedesktop.org's modular trees? Are they basically the same code apart from the (large) configuration differences, or is one behind/ahead of the other regarding drivers, core functionality, etc.? For instance, I know that XOrg has basically all the XFree86 4.4 functionality in it (they're advertising it). I have no idea whether the modular freedesktop.org trees have the same collection of code merged in (or whether they intend to). (I hope so.) Any idea? The actual codebases don't diverge too much, except we have more radical plans, such as using libdl for our loader (while retaining XFree86-ELF capability). -- Daniel Stone[EMAIL PROTECTED] Debian: the universal operating system http://www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
xorg vs. xlibs/xserver/xapps?
Daniel Stone wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 06:51:03PM +0300, Dan Korostelev wrote: Is there any plans to replace XFree86 with XOrg (http://freedesktop.org/Software/xorg), which is actually a fork of XFree 4.4 with free licence. Sorry for my english. Bye. No, but there are plans to replace it with freedesktop.org's modular xlibs/xserver/xapps trees, to make it far easier to maintain. To switch to a technical question What are the differences between XOrg's monolithic tree and freedesktop.org's modular trees? Are they basically the same code apart from the (large) configuration differences, or is one behind/ahead of the other regarding drivers, core functionality, etc.? For instance, I know that XOrg has basically all the XFree86 4.4 functionality in it (they're advertising it). I have no idea whether the modular freedesktop.org trees have the same collection of code merged in (or whether they intend to). (I hope so.) Any idea? -- Make sure your vote will count. http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
Re: xorg vs. xlibs/xserver/xapps?
Around 17 o'clock on Mar 27, Nathanael Nerode wrote: for some reason Peter's invited talk proposal vanished . What do you think? I don't know if there's a spot in freenix for something like this if you are interested. He's a good guy (don't know if you know him- very active in our Security community.) Sure looks like a nice talk. I don't currently have a spot for him, and won't unless several of our paper authors bail on us (not that I think this will happen, but one never knows). -keith pgphgLCZh14mw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: xorg vs. xlibs/xserver/xapps?
Around 17 o'clock on Mar 27, Nathanael Nerode wrote: What are the differences between XOrg's monolithic tree and freedesktop.org's modular trees? Are they basically the same code apart from the (large) configuration differences, or is one behind/ahead of the other regarding drivers, core functionality, etc.? There aren't any significant technical differences, and I'll be merging those across once the X.Org release is ready. The biggest differences right now are trademark related. David Dawes has indicated that he will agressively assert rights to the XFree86 trademark, and has even taken steps to register it with the US PTO. On advice of council, those doing the X.Org release have undertaken to try and make it such that the X.Org release does not infringe on the XFree86 trademark. For the libraries, these differences are very minor, usually affecting only documentation. The goal is to migrate development effort from the monolithic tree to the modular tree while preserving full compatibility. For instance, I know that XOrg has basically all the XFree86 4.4 functionality in it (they're advertising it). I have no idea whether the modular freedesktop.org trees have the same collection of code merged in (or whether they intend to). (I hope so.) Any idea? If you look at the changes from XFree86 4.3 (current unstable) to the X.Org release, you'll see very few changes -- XFree86 has never done much work in the libraries and this release is no different. The modular tree was cut over a few months earlier than X.Org, and there are probably a few bugfixes related to the Sun IPv6 support (which we'll have to look at closely before enabling for debian). -keith pgpE9UhQkQCkQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
