Hi folks.
Trying to compile libX11 according to latest SVN, I get:
checking for pkg-config... /usr/bin/pkg-config
checking pkg-config is at least version 0.9.0... yes
checking for XPROTO... yes
checking for X11... configure: error: Package requirements (xextproto xtrans
xcb-xlib >= 0.9.92) were
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 1) The book instructions mention that XCB is "optional", whereas libX11
> pretty
> clearly wants/expects it to be there. Therefore, should it be upgraded
> to "recommended"? (I have noted the book mentions the --without-xcb configure
> option, btw).
This should be add
On 6/30/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 3) Is there a reason XCB was not added to the book? (It needs the
> libpthread-stubs package and xsltproc from a quick look at the dependencies).
Yes - Java and internal Xorg problems. E.g., with libXi 1.0.2
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> I think we should just push in XCB, but disable the assertions since I
> don't think we can track down all these issues yet. Attached patch is
> what I'm sitting on + CPPFLAGS=-DNDEBUG for libxcb. What do you guys
> think?
You'll get bashed by Xorg developers if you do this.
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> I think it was the XCB developers to be exact, but same difference. I
> understand their argument, but the alternative isn't much better. I
> just read that Skype has the same locking issues. What would I do in
> that case? Even if I could convince the Skype people there was
On 7/2/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > I think we should just push in XCB, but disable the assertions since I
> > don't think we can track down all these issues yet. Attached patch is
> > what I'm sitting on + CPPFLAGS=-DNDEBUG for libxcb. What do you
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 07/02/07 09:46 CST:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> Also please make it clear that this is a workaround and that the bugs are
> not in libxcb, but in applications.
>
>> Well, why don't I work on the 7.2 updates first? libX11-1.0.2 needs a
>> patch, right?
>
On 7/3/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 07/02/07 09:46 CST:
> > Dan Nicholson wrote:
> >
> > Also please make it clear that this is a workaround and that the bugs are
> > not in libxcb, but in applications.
> >
> >> Well, why don't I work on
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Hope that sums things up.
Yes, thats a good summary.
> You have an opinion on the matter? Keep in
> mind that those last patches that Alexander pointed to are a separate
> issue that will be addressed soon. Using the libX11 in the book right
> now should be fine.
They are
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I'm trying to follow this thread, but I'm a bit confused as to what
> exactly is broken. Is the bottom line that the BLFS instructions for
> installing Xorg-7.2 are broken and shouldn't be used?
>
> Or is eliminating libxcb a solution that works and has no affect on
> othe
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> ...the existing Xorg-7.2 instructions should not be used, for reasons
> unrelated to XCB. E.g., accelerated indirect rendering (AIGLX, needed for
> beryl and compiz) won't work, because Mesa and Xorg disagree on the location
> of DRI drivers...
>
>
Apologies for
taipan67 wrote:
> The instructions in the development book for MesaLib-6.5.2 &
> Xorg-Server-1.2.0 appear to use configuration switches to correlate the
> location of the drivers between the two.
Correct - but the instructions contain a typo in the directory name. A quick
test is that glxgears
On 7/3/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> However, the existing Xorg-7.2 instructions should not be used, for reasons
> unrelated to XCB. E.g., accelerated indirect rendering (AIGLX, needed for
> beryl and compiz) won't work, because Mesa and Xorg disagree on the location
> of
On 7/3/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> taipan67 wrote:
> > The instructions in the development book for MesaLib-6.5.2 &
> > Xorg-Server-1.2.0 appear to use configuration switches to correlate the
> > location of the drivers between the two.
>
> Correct - but the instructions
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Are you sure about this?
No, this follows from "dry" reading of the book.
> Mesa is told that the DRI driver dir is
> $XORG_PREFIX/lib/X11/modules/dri (the macro is set by
> DRI_DRIVER_INSTALL_DIR at make time). So is xorg-server. Where's the
> problem?
Copy-and-paste of
I wrote:
> Xorg-server: --with-module-dir=$XORG_PREFIX/lib/X11/modules =
> /usr/lib/X11/modules/dri
Oops, I should have quoted
--with-dri-driver-path=$XORG_PREFIX/lib/X11/modules/dri, with the same end
result.
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> taipan67 wrote:
>
>> The instructions in the development book for MesaLib-6.5.2 &
>> Xorg-Server-1.2.0 appear to use configuration switches to correlate the
>> location of the drivers between the two.
>>
>
> Correct - but the instructions contain a typo in t
On 7/3/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Anyway, we were going to change both to /usr/lib/dri.
That's fine by me.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 7/3/07, taipan67 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> So they do - i didn't notice that before, thanks.
>
> MesaLib-6.5.2 :- ${XORG_PREFIX}/lib/modules/dri
>
> Xorg-Server-1.2.0 :- $XORG_PREFIX/lib/X11/modules/dri
>
> ...Which is the correct one..?
Whichever one you want, but the second one has bee
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 07/03/07 09:38 CST:
> On 7/3/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm trying to follow this thread, but I'm a bit confused as to what
>> exactly is broken. Is the bottom line that the BLFS instructions for
>> installing Xorg-7.2 are broken and should
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Only thing I can think of that I've seen in this thread is the decision
> to move the DRI directory to /usr instead of $XORG_PREFIX. If DRI stuff
> ships with Xorg, why would we want it somewhere other than $XORG_PREFIX?
OK, $XORG_PREFIX/lib/dri.
However, the question is
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 07/03/07 20:28 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Only thing I can think of that I've seen in this thread is the decision
>> to move the DRI directory to /usr instead of $XORG_PREFIX. If DRI stuff
>> ships with Xorg, why would we want it somewhere other than
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I install Xorg in /opt/X11R7.2.
OK, my objection to $XORG_PREFIX is invalidated by this.
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone actually built a system with Xorg in /opt and with no deviations
> from the book in packages (at least Qt and links) that use it? If not, I
> would have to say that /usr is the only supportable prefix and that we
> should remove the $XORG_PREFIX vari
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>
>> Only thing I can think of that I've seen in this thread is the decision
>> to move the DRI directory to /usr instead of $XORG_PREFIX. If DRI stuff
>> ships with Xorg, why would we want it somewhere other than $XORG_PREFIX?
>>
>
> O
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 07/03/07 21:01 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> I install Xorg in /opt/X11R7.2.
>
> OK, my objection to $XORG_PREFIX is invalidated by this.
Note that the *first* paragraph in the 'X Window System Components'
'Configuring The X Window System' says this (wh
hi
On 7/3/07, taipan67 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> ...the existing Xorg-7.2 instructions should not be used, for reasons
> unrelated to XCB. E.g., accelerated indirect rendering (AIGLX, needed
for
> beryl and compiz) won't work, because Mesa and Xorg disagree on t
On 7/2/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/2/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> > > 848b80f77b20ae1fa5c882bbfa531ebc libX11-1.1.1.tar.bz2
> >
> > This contains a known idle-spin bug when compiled against XCB:
> > http://bugs.debian.or
On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 05:12:02PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> Next is XCB. I'll be adding the distro patch which supplies an
> environment variable to workaround locking errors in applications.
> Holler if you don't want this approach. Alexander describes it here:
>
> http://linuxfromscratch.o
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> OK, below is what I will push in tomorrow if no one complains.
This is certainly good as a base, and fixes can be made on top of that.
> +The libpthread-stubs package provides
> +weak aliases for pthread functions not provided in libc or otherwise
> +available b
On 7/9/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > OK, below is what I will push in tomorrow if no one complains.
>
> This is certainly good as a base, and fixes can be made on top of that.
>
> > +The libpthread-stubs package provides
> > +weak aliases fo
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Right. I didn't know any good way to describe this. Is it all Linux
> systems, or glibc/Linux systems since glibc provides the pthread
> implementation?
AFAIK, only glibc (but I am not sure - it may be a good idea to say that on
glibc-based linux systems, only a dummy pkgc
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 07/03/07 21:01 CST:
>
>> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>
>>> I install Xorg in /opt/X11R7.2.
>>>
>> OK, my objection to $XORG_PREFIX is invalidated by this.
>>
>
> Note that the *first* paragraph in the 'X Window System
33 matches
Mail list logo
