Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-25 Thread Jonathan Murphy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Simon Geard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 09:12 -0500, Jonathan Murphy wrote: > > Specifically freetype and fontconfig. I was unable to build either 6.9 > > or 7.0 with the current BLFS versions. This messed up my fonts, > > so a

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread Simon Geard
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 09:12 -0500, Jonathan Murphy wrote: > Specifically freetype and fontconfig. I was unable to build either 6.9 > or 7.0 with the current BLFS versions. This messed up my fonts, > so after installing 6.9 I reinstalled the BLFS versions which sorted > that out. Messed up in what

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread DJ Lucas
Thomas Pegg wrote: Dont' forget the broken kd.h file (from llh). It's not really broken, it's done intentionally. Plus it's a header from glibc not llh. Yes, thanks for the correction. Do you know why this is done? Other threads suggest the proper fix is just to undef _LINUX_TYPES_H aft

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread Jonathan Murphy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Benton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jaap Struyk wrote: > > Op ma 23-01-2006, om 15:12 schreef Jonathan Murphy: > > > >> I was unable to build either 6.9 > >> or 7.0 with the current BLFS versions. This messed up my fonts, > > Is this a "stay a

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread Andrew Benton
Jaap Struyk wrote: Op ma 23-01-2006, om 15:12 schreef Jonathan Murphy: I was unable to build either 6.9 or 7.0 with the current BLFS versions. This messed up my fonts, Is this a "stay away from newer xorgs"? Or tar up a copy of the fonts from xorg-6.8.2. I don't like the fonts from xorg-7

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread Jonathan Murphy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Well that's up to you. I found that in order to install X11R6.9 I had to downgrade freetype and fontconfig. This messed up my fonts in some applications, presumably because they were depending upon the more recent versions. I have reinstalled Freetype

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-24 Thread Jaap Struyk
Op ma 23-01-2006, om 15:12 schreef Jonathan Murphy: > I was unable to build either 6.9 > or 7.0 with the current BLFS versions. This messed up my fonts, Is this a "stay away from newer xorgs"? -- Groetjes Japie -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxf

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-23 Thread Jonathan Murphy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Other than the assorted weirdness reported earlier (which I'm pretty sure is my fault and has no impact on the functionality of my system), X11R6.9 (eventually) built without problems for me. I found the following link useful: http://dri.freedesktop.o

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-22 Thread Jaap Struyk
Op zo 22-01-2006, om 18:31 schreef Ken Moffat: > The only difference in building is that you shoud add '#define > BuildXterm YES' to host.def if you want to use xterms. Sorry to interrupt but I tryed to build 6.9 and ran into: /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lrpcsvc This didn't happen with 6.8.2 -- G

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-22 Thread Thomas Pegg
Thomas Pegg wrote: Dont' forget the broken kd.h file (from llh). It's not really broken, it's done intentionally. Plus it's a header from glibc not llh. Correction, it is provided by both glibc and llh, but the glibc version seems to get used because it's included from other headers refer

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-22 Thread Thomas Pegg
Dont' forget the broken kd.h file (from llh). It's not really broken, it's done intentionally. Plus it's a header from glibc not llh. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-22 Thread DJ Lucas
Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Brandin Creech wrote: I'm tempted to go with 6.9.0, since I am under the impression that it is identical to 7.0.0 except for the fact that 7.0.0 is modular (and thus, presumably more difficult to compile). I was wondering if there are any compatibility pro

Re: Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-22 Thread Ken Moffat
On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Brandin Creech wrote: I'm tempted to go with 6.9.0, since I am under the impression that it is identical to 7.0.0 except for the fact that 7.0.0 is modular (and thus, presumably more difficult to compile). I was wondering if there are any compatibility problems that I should

Xorg 6.9.0 vs. 7.0

2006-01-20 Thread Brandin Creech
Hi, list. I'm currently using X.org 6.8.2 per the BLFS SVN instructions, but I was thinking about upgrading, especially since someone here reported that it had better acceleration. I'm tempted to go with 6.9.0, since I am under the impression that it is identical to 7.0.0 except for the fact that