Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-04-02 Thread Robert Noland 
On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 16:14 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Robert Noland wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 22:36 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> > 
> > I recently got kde4.2 working on my home box, and all the neat eye candy 
> > things
> > that are added, I'll have to see, maybe you're right, XFree86 might not work
> > with KDE, but saying that XFree86 hasn't had an update since December makes 
> > no
> > sense to me, versus the fact that I *think* git allows no release tags, so I
> > think one could argue that there are no Xorg releases at all.  That, or I 
> > don't
> > know git well enough, either is possible.  If there are tags in git, I will 
> > go
> > back and reread the git docs until I find them.
> > 
> >> git has tags and branches, all of which can be checked out from fd.o.
> >> AFAIK, things aren't tagged for "Xorg releases", but all of the packages
> >> carry tags and some have release branches.
> 
> I was hoping I would get an answer on this.  It is indeed a feature of git, or
> has it been grafted on by convention?  If git's got it, I'll drop this
> particular topic, and try to find the command I must have missed.  If those
> features are done by convention, I guessed I was relying on the git man pages,
> and just didn't look hard enough at the web pages for Xorg to spot the info.
> I've been a bit critical of git in my mind, and need to get myself either
> justified or corrected.

GIT-TAG(1)

git has a lot of nice features... It also has it's weak points in my
mind.  Generally the biggest advantage and disadvantage is the
distributed nature of git.  It is very convenient to make local commits
and rebase and keep local branches, but I think it leads to chaos if it
isn't controlled.  Everyone has a master repo.

I pretty regularly use cvs, svn and git these days, covering all my
different corners of hell...

robert.

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAknTyzgACgkQz62J6PPcoOlfrgCfc9/ZsGKtJOhb4xqUecVLfrhy
> NDoAnRcfOJdQH1OsxVBTtjlbxlN1jyLG
> =uHG+
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
-- 
Robert Noland 
FreeBSD


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-04-01 Thread Chuck Robey 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Robert Noland wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 22:36 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> 
> I recently got kde4.2 working on my home box, and all the neat eye candy 
> things
> that are added, I'll have to see, maybe you're right, XFree86 might not work
> with KDE, but saying that XFree86 hasn't had an update since December makes no
> sense to me, versus the fact that I *think* git allows no release tags, so I
> think one could argue that there are no Xorg releases at all.  That, or I 
> don't
> know git well enough, either is possible.  If there are tags in git, I will go
> back and reread the git docs until I find them.
> 
>> git has tags and branches, all of which can be checked out from fd.o.
>> AFAIK, things aren't tagged for "Xorg releases", but all of the packages
>> carry tags and some have release branches.

I was hoping I would get an answer on this.  It is indeed a feature of git, or
has it been grafted on by convention?  If git's got it, I'll drop this
particular topic, and try to find the command I must have missed.  If those
features are done by convention, I guessed I was relying on the git man pages,
and just didn't look hard enough at the web pages for Xorg to spot the info.
I've been a bit critical of git in my mind, and need to get myself either
justified or corrected.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknTyzgACgkQz62J6PPcoOlfrgCfc9/ZsGKtJOhb4xqUecVLfrhy
NDoAnRcfOJdQH1OsxVBTtjlbxlN1jyLG
=uHG+
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-03-31 Thread Robert Noland 
On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 22:36 -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> matt donovan wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Mark Linimon  > > wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:13:46PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> > > I need to understand why all support for XFree86 has been removed from
> > > our ports.
> > 
> > Because no one volunteered to do the work to support it.
> > 
> > At any given time there are at least a couple of dozen X11-related PRs
> > outstanding, and more questions posted to various mailing lists.  A lot
> > of them are of the form "I can't get X version foo to work with my XYZ
> > card."  Without anyone willing to work on such things, there was no
> > reason to keep doing the extra work to support the parallel set of
> > infrastructure.  (Removing the code to be able to pick one or the other
> > greatly simplified bsd.*.mk, for instance.)
> > 
> > It's simply a question of how many hours of work people want to put in,
> > much like any other FreeBSD ports.
> > 
> 
> > 
> > Also many programs compile only with Xorg now. Well without patches of
> > course. The small programs anyways. also Xfree86 does not have regular
> > updates either from what I can see December 28, 2008 is their last one.
> > Xorg gets updated roughly every month since they became modular. but yes
> > the main reason is no one to maintain it.
> 
> I don't know git anywhere's near as well as I know cvs, but it seems to me 
> that
> xorg doesn't have any TAGS so you can't ask for a particular release, isn't 
> that
> true?  I think that is probably a comment on git, not Xorg.  I guess, seeing
> that there's about 1/4 the amount of work involved in updating xFree86 versus
> Xorg, I didn't expect that it was a work thing.  Finally, I really don't like
> the fact that Xorg comes in all of those little packages, so that without our
> ports system, it might be prohibitively difficult to assemble Xorg.  Like it
> would be, I suppose, for KDE.  I *like* how you can deal with XFree86 as one
> item.  If there was some way to get KDE as one compileable tarball, that would
> be a good thing also.
> 
> I recently got kde4.2 working on my home box, and all the neat eye candy 
> things
> that are added, I'll have to see, maybe you're right, XFree86 might not work
> with KDE, but saying that XFree86 hasn't had an update since December makes no
> sense to me, versus the fact that I *think* git allows no release tags, so I
> think one could argue that there are no Xorg releases at all.  That, or I 
> don't
> know git well enough, either is possible.  If there are tags in git, I will go
> back and reread the git docs until I find them.

git has tags and branches, all of which can be checked out from fd.o.
AFAIK, things aren't tagged for "Xorg releases", but all of the packages
carry tags and some have release branches.

robert.

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iEYEARECAAYFAknS0y0ACgkQz62J6PPcoOl/YwCfSj6nbPi2leLdgZFx0Vi1vF42
> ngkAnixY2RvW/1BkdJb/ln8NpMjNKlMm
> =hSgi
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
-- 
Robert Noland 
FreeBSD


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-03-31 Thread matt donovan 


>
>
> I don't know git anywhere's near as well as I know cvs, but it seems to me
> that
> xorg doesn't have any TAGS so you can't ask for a particular release, isn't
> that
> true?  I think that is probably a comment on git, not Xorg.  I guess,
> seeing
> that there's about 1/4 the amount of work involved in updating xFree86
> versus
> Xorg, I didn't expect that it was a work thing.  Finally, I really don't
> like
> the fact that Xorg comes in all of those little packages, so that without
> our
> ports system, it might be prohibitively difficult to assemble Xorg.  Like
> it
> would be, I suppose, for KDE.  I *like* how you can deal with XFree86 as
> one
> item.  If there was some way to get KDE as one compileable tarball, that
> would
> be a good thing also.
>
> 

Xorg doesn't fully need to be recompiled it was one giant package until they
decided it would be easier for developers to break up the system to smaller
ones. For instance lets say x-server 1.6 came out called xorg 7.5 well you
will only have to recompile x-server really.

Also I went by Xfree86 webpage which states last stable release is from
December 2008 before that it was Aug. 2007
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-03-31 Thread Chuck Robey 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

matt donovan wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Mark Linimon  > wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:13:46PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> > I need to understand why all support for XFree86 has been removed from
> > our ports.
> 
> Because no one volunteered to do the work to support it.
> 
> At any given time there are at least a couple of dozen X11-related PRs
> outstanding, and more questions posted to various mailing lists.  A lot
> of them are of the form "I can't get X version foo to work with my XYZ
> card."  Without anyone willing to work on such things, there was no
> reason to keep doing the extra work to support the parallel set of
> infrastructure.  (Removing the code to be able to pick one or the other
> greatly simplified bsd.*.mk, for instance.)
> 
> It's simply a question of how many hours of work people want to put in,
> much like any other FreeBSD ports.
> 

> 
> Also many programs compile only with Xorg now. Well without patches of
> course. The small programs anyways. also Xfree86 does not have regular
> updates either from what I can see December 28, 2008 is their last one.
> Xorg gets updated roughly every month since they became modular. but yes
> the main reason is no one to maintain it.

I don't know git anywhere's near as well as I know cvs, but it seems to me that
xorg doesn't have any TAGS so you can't ask for a particular release, isn't that
true?  I think that is probably a comment on git, not Xorg.  I guess, seeing
that there's about 1/4 the amount of work involved in updating xFree86 versus
Xorg, I didn't expect that it was a work thing.  Finally, I really don't like
the fact that Xorg comes in all of those little packages, so that without our
ports system, it might be prohibitively difficult to assemble Xorg.  Like it
would be, I suppose, for KDE.  I *like* how you can deal with XFree86 as one
item.  If there was some way to get KDE as one compileable tarball, that would
be a good thing also.

I recently got kde4.2 working on my home box, and all the neat eye candy things
that are added, I'll have to see, maybe you're right, XFree86 might not work
with KDE, but saying that XFree86 hasn't had an update since December makes no
sense to me, versus the fact that I *think* git allows no release tags, so I
think one could argue that there are no Xorg releases at all.  That, or I don't
know git well enough, either is possible.  If there are tags in git, I will go
back and reread the git docs until I find them.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknS0y0ACgkQz62J6PPcoOl/YwCfSj6nbPi2leLdgZFx0Vi1vF42
ngkAnixY2RvW/1BkdJb/ln8NpMjNKlMm
=hSgi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-03-31 Thread matt donovan 
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Mark Linimon  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:13:46PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> > I need to understand why all support for XFree86 has been removed from
> > our ports.
>
> Because no one volunteered to do the work to support it.
>
> At any given time there are at least a couple of dozen X11-related PRs
> outstanding, and more questions posted to various mailing lists.  A lot
> of them are of the form "I can't get X version foo to work with my XYZ
> card."  Without anyone willing to work on such things, there was no
> reason to keep doing the extra work to support the parallel set of
> infrastructure.  (Removing the code to be able to pick one or the other
> greatly simplified bsd.*.mk, for instance.)
>
> It's simply a question of how many hours of work people want to put in,
> much like any other FreeBSD ports.
>
> mcl
> ___
> freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
>

Also many programs compile only with Xorg now. Well without patches of
course. The small programs anyways. also Xfree86 does not have regular
updates either from what I can see December 28, 2008 is their last one. Xorg
gets updated roughly every month since they became modular. but yes the main
reason is no one to maintain it.
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Re: why was XFree86 dropped for ports?

2009-03-31 Thread Mark Linimon 
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 01:13:46PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> I need to understand why all support for XFree86 has been removed from
> our ports.

Because no one volunteered to do the work to support it.

At any given time there are at least a couple of dozen X11-related PRs
outstanding, and more questions posted to various mailing lists.  A lot
of them are of the form "I can't get X version foo to work with my XYZ
card."  Without anyone willing to work on such things, there was no
reason to keep doing the extra work to support the parallel set of
infrastructure.  (Removing the code to be able to pick one or the other
greatly simplified bsd.*.mk, for instance.)

It's simply a question of how many hours of work people want to put in,
much like any other FreeBSD ports.

mcl
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"