Xorg-7.3 and BLFS-6.3?
ken at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Dec 29 17:51:19 PST 2007
On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 12:36:30PM -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Hey guys. Anybody started on this for the book? There is not a ticket
> currently. I'm winging my way through it right now, assuming that the
> book will eventually catch up...or that I'll catch it up. Looking at
> the list of fixes for the coming xorg-server-1.4.1, I'm wondering if the
> book should wait. Any known pitfalls for those that have done it
> already? Is there a list of dependencies to follow someplace or just
> continue checking each? What about Mesa? I've used 7.0.2 and created
> the glw.pc.in file in a patch. So far so good at completion of all
> current libs listed in X11R7.3/src/, based on current BLFS
> instructions. I've seen pixman and evdev mentions a lot lately, and Dan
> an Alexander seem to be involved on the xorg devel lists. You guys have
> anything to add? Other than evdev-1.2.0, anything else to be concerned
For the little that my thoughts on this are worth (inter-alia, I
only build for radeon and nv, I'm much more concerned with issues
on non-x86 architectures, I don't make any use of dbus, and I
certainly don't build hal or use the gnome or kde desktops - call
me an old fogey if you like ;)
1. BLFS almost looks as if it has set its face against xcb. Works
fine for me, even in 7.2. Of course, I've dropped all binary
packages other than realplayer on x86.
2. I didn't know Mesa-7.0.2 was out. Been using 7.0.1 with 7.3, no
known problems, but I expect 7.0.2 has a load of bugfixes ?
3. Possibly, some of the drivers need the new 'pci' library
(pciaccess) - certainly, neither ati nor nv, nor any of the
non-video drivers that I build, use it. But, there was a comment
from I think Keith Packard on lkml the other week which implied it
was in use in xorg-7.3.
4. Evdev-1.2.0 is apparently required, but I don't notice the
difference compared to the previous version (maybe I would notice if
I knew what it did, maybe not).
5. For the ati drivers, 6.7.196 is definitely good IMHO (haven't tried
.197 in a known good environment yet). Supposedly, 6.7 is needed
for randr-1.2, but the latest 6.6 seemed ok to me on one machine
when 6.7.195 was both the latest release and broken.
6. I've spoken too much about pixman-0.9.6 on support ;) Again, it
depends on the architecture and perhaps on the video driver - my
ppc64 with nv and ppc with radeon are happy with 0.9.5, other arches
7. Server 126.96.36.199 seems good, and might be as good as we get before
Funnily enough, I built 7.2 using the versions in blfs (plus xcb
stuff) a couple of days ago for the LFS-6.3 system I've just
installed. I was somewhat surprised to see that blfs seemed to be
recommending people to download all of the video drivers. In the
beginning, replicating the non-modular build had merit, but a lot of
the parts are no longer useful to most people with semi-modern
installations, and encouraging people to build all of the video
drivers just highlights that.
I don't have an opinion about whether 7.2 or 7.3 should be in 6.3,
there are enough other old things like gnome-2.18 and kde-3.5.6 :
for what I'm using, I don't see any "must upgrade" things in any of
these (in itself, that is good - it's not that long since a version
upgrade fixed noticeable bugs or made things noticeably better).
The pain is in identifying good versions of everything,
particularly the video drivers, and trying to find reliable
information on which versions are intended to be used in 7.3.
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
More information about the blfs-dev