Hi,
Are there any plans to use XFree86 4.4 with FC2? I'm running it now and it is *way* better than the 4.3 branch in terms of speed, font reliability and window handling.
I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and that is shipped.
TTFN
Paul
No, unless Red Hat changed their mind very recently.
http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/x-packagers/2004-February/000004.html
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 12:28, Paul wrote:
Hi,
Are there any plans to use XFree86 4.4 with FC2? I'm running it now and it is *way* better than the 4.3 branch in terms of speed, font reliability and window handling.
I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and that is shipped.
TTFN
Paul
Paul Bender wrote:
No, unless Red Hat changed their mind very recently.
http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/x-packagers/2004-February/000004.html
I applaud RedHat/Fedora for this decision. Even if the licensing issue were resolved today, other problems still remain. For a very long time there has been something "wrong" with respect to the attitude of the Xfree86 project. Team play does not seem to be a goal for them, which is bad for the community in general.
-Steve
Hello-
i wonder (in the future) if there will now become two separate branches to the XFree86 code of if a replacement will be developed. i heard of a replacement to X-windows called y-windows; it supposedly is being written as a modern, open source (GPL'd) window architecture, which is both modular and network transparent among other things.i wonder if something like this will be considered. i believe a working prototype exists but is in the early stages. just a thought.
mark.
--- Steve Bergman steve@rueb.com wrote:
Paul Bender wrote:
No, unless Red Hat changed their mind very recently.
http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/x-packagers/2004-February/000004.html
I applaud RedHat/Fedora for this decision. Even if the licensing issue were resolved today, other problems still remain. For a very long time there has been something "wrong" with respect to the attitude of the Xfree86 project. Team play does not seem to be a goal for them, which is bad for the community in general.
-Steve
-- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 13:30 -0800, Mark Fonnemann wrote:
Hello-
i wonder (in the future) if there will now become two separate branches to
the XFree86 code of if a replacement will be developed. i heard of a replacement to X-windows called y-windows; it supposedly is being written as a modern, open source (GPL'd) window architecture, which is both modular and network transparent among other things.i wonder if something like this will be considered. i believe a working prototype exists but is in the early stages. just a thought.
mark.
Y-Windows is something completly different from XWindows. The problem now is what are the options: 1) Keep going with XFree86 4.3 + selected patches from 4.4 written until the licence was changed. This seems like the most likely one. 2) Add another X-Server. Here there are many options: a) Xouvert (Unless they will continue to work with XFree86 codebase, which means that the licence of their software will change) b) XServ from freedesktop.org. Unfortunately this project is still in it's early stages of development. There are of course some very cool features, but it's not gonna be stable enough soon. c) X11 from X.org. It's the base of most of the XServers currently existing. Unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do until it's a drop- ing replacement for XFree86.
In the fedora development process they are trying to change all the deps from XFree86 provided ones to more generic ones, but this also takes time. The first thing that should be done, when changing an X-Server, is adding in it's provides something like X11-devel. Then all the appliactions that need the X11 headers (there are many trust me), should have their BUILD Requirements changed from XFree86- devel to X11-devel. This is only for the headers, but there are many others which are problematic. Just changing these in all the specs, should make a replacement of the X-Server easier, but, what are the options. In my opinion XFree86 4.3, or 4.4-RC1 (where it still has the old licence, I belive) should be good enough. Just patch that one.
Razvan Corneliu C.R. "d3vi1" VILT wrote:
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 13:30 -0800, Mark Fonnemann wrote:
Hello-
i wonder (in the future) if there will now become two separate branches to the XFree86 code of if a replacement will be developed. i heard of a replacement to X-windows called y-windows; it supposedly is being written as a modern, open source (GPL'd) window architecture, which is both modular and network transparent among other things.i wonder if something like this will be considered. i believe a working prototype exists but is in the early stages. just a thought.
mark.
Y-Windows is something completly different from XWindows. The problem now is what are the options:
- Keep going with XFree86 4.3 + selected patches from 4.4 written until
the licence was changed. This seems like the most likely one. 2) Add another X-Server. Here there are many options: a) Xouvert (Unless they will continue to work with XFree86 codebase, which means that the licence of their software will change) b) XServ from freedesktop.org. Unfortunately this project is still in it's early stages of development. There are of course some very cool features, but it's not gonna be stable enough soon. c) X11 from X.org. It's the base of most of the XServers currently existing. Unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do until it's a drop- ing replacement for XFree86.
In the fedora development process they are trying to change all the deps from XFree86 provided ones to more generic ones, but this also takes time. The first thing that should be done, when changing an X-Server, is adding in it's provides something like X11-devel. Then all the appliactions that need the X11 headers (there are many trust me), should have their BUILD Requirements changed from XFree86- devel to X11-devel. This is only for the headers, but there are many others which are problematic. Just changing these in all the specs, should make a replacement of the X-Server easier, but, what are the options. In my opinion XFree86 4.3, or 4.4-RC1 (where it still has the old licence, I belive) should be good enough. Just patch that one.
Xouvert should be a drop in replacement. In fact they're including MAS into the next release and making all the source more modular so it's easier to implement changes. Plus a lot of other cool things with drivers and other stuff should happen.
However these guys need more coders to keep things going IMO.
Corey
Razvan Corneliu C.R. "d3vi1" VILT wrote:
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 13:30 -0800, Mark Fonnemann wrote:
Hello-
i wonder (in the future) if there will now become two separate branches to the XFree86 code of if a replacement will be developed. i heard of a replacement to X-windows called y-windows; it supposedly is being written as a modern, open source (GPL'd) window architecture, which is both modular and network transparent among other things.i wonder if something like this will be considered. i believe a working prototype exists but is in the early stages. just a thought.
mark.
Y-Windows is something completly different from XWindows. The problem now is what are the options:
- Keep going with XFree86 4.3 + selected patches from 4.4 written until
the licence was changed. This seems like the most likely one. 2) Add another X-Server. Here there are many options: a) Xouvert (Unless they will continue to work with XFree86 codebase, which means that the licence of their software will change) b) XServ from freedesktop.org. Unfortunately this project is still in it's early stages of development. There are of course some very cool features, but it's not gonna be stable enough soon. c) X11 from X.org. It's the base of most of the XServers currently existing. Unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do until it's a drop- ing replacement for XFree86.
In the fedora development process they are trying to change all the deps from XFree86 provided ones to more generic ones, but this also takes time. The first thing that should be done, when changing an X-Server, is adding in it's provides something like X11-devel. Then all the appliactions that need the X11 headers (there are many trust me), should have their BUILD Requirements changed from XFree86- devel to X11-devel. This is only for the headers, but there are many others which are problematic. Just changing these in all the specs, should make a replacement of the X-Server easier, but, what are the options. In my opinion XFree86 4.3, or 4.4-RC1 (where it still has the old licence, I belive) should be good enough. Just patch that one.
And actually I've been lurking in their IRC room for quite awhile.. backtracked a bit..
[16:11] <SirDibos> Odin-: we ARE folding into keithp's project. [16:11] <SirDibos> Odin-: just not in a way that's obvious to outsiders. [16:11] <SirDibos> Odin-: we'll be sharing drivers and modules. [16:12] <SirDibos> Odin-: he is purposely doing the new extensions in a way that we can just drop them into Xouvert. [16:12] <mrMister> SirDibos: are you sure about that? [16:12] <SirDibos> Odin-: Xouvert and Xserver will eventually merge, once Xserver has all the drivers.
SirDibos AFAIK is one of the lead coders of Xouvert.. So it seems Xouvert and fd.org Xserve will eventually merge.
Maybe someone at redhat could prod them along a bit =)
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:00:36AM +0200, Razvan Corneliu C.R. d3vi1 VILT wrote:
- Add another X-Server. Here there are many options: a) Xouvert (Unless they will continue to work with XFree86
2a is as good as deead
c) X11 from X.org. It's the base of most of the XServers currently
existing. Unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do until it's a drop- ing replacement for XFree86.
Actually its looking very close to ready to roll already. The tree is basically XFree 4.4 without the problem files.
Alan Cox wrote:
On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 12:00:36AM +0200, Razvan Corneliu C.R. d3vi1 VILT wrote:
- Add another X-Server. Here there are many options: a) Xouvert (Unless they will continue to work with XFree86
2a is as good as deead
c) X11 from X.org. It's the base of most of the XServers currently
existing. Unfortunately, there's a lot of work to do until it's a drop- ing replacement for XFree86.
Actually its looking very close to ready to roll already. The tree is basically XFree 4.4 without the problem files.
So assuming they dont take the crack the XFree86 group decided to ingest.. FC 3 might have the vanilla X11?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Hi paul. I have been following this for a while, and I think the main reason that no distributions are shipping XFree86 4.4.0 is because in the license agreement, it requires written permission to advertise, and distribute binaries. Along with adding some sort of notice to the packaging, etc.
This is what's stopping XFree86 4.4.0 from being shipped with it's current licenses.
Thank you,
John Dee
Paul wrote:
| Hi, | | Are there any plans to use XFree86 4.4 with FC2? I'm running it now and | it is *way* better than the 4.3 branch in terms of speed, font | reliability and window handling. | | I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% | kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and | that is shipped. | | TTFN | | Paul
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:28:03PM +0000, Paul wrote:
Are there any plans to use XFree86 4.4 with FC2? I'm running it now and it is *way* better than the 4.3 branch in terms of speed, font reliability and window handling.
I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and that is shipped.
OpenBSD is also not shipping XFree86 4.4: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc&m=107696705911864&w=2
Even if it weren't for the license, I imagine it's too late in the release cycle to include it anyway.
-Barry K. Nathan barryn@pobox.com
On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:28:03PM +0000, Paul wrote:
Are there any plans to use XFree86 4.4 with FC2? I'm running it now and it is *way* better than the 4.3 branch in terms of speed, font reliability and window handling.
No distribution as far as I know plans to ship XFree 4.4. A tree without the problematic changes is being maintained by 'everyone else' as the X.org tree at freedesktop.org. I'm glad 4.4 is working well for you since it should mean the x.org tree also does.
I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and that is shipped.
Apache doesn't get linked with GPL apps (and Apache has always been GPL non friendly because of other things our version links with). So the whole "apache shock horror" thing has really had most people scratching their heads attempting to understand why it is a story.
Alan
On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 19:37 -0500, Alan Cox wrote:
A tree without the problematic changes is being maintained by 'everyone else' as the X.org tree at freedesktop.org.
Could this be put in test rpms so some people could test along side XFree 4.3 with FC2 or is it just not ready yet?
Paul said: [snip]
I'm aware that there is something up with the licence not being 100% kosher with the GPL, but should that stop it? Apache has a wrangle and that is shipped.
As a side note, Apache's httpd never has been GPL compatible. The only thing that has changed is that the Apache group thinks their new license is GPL compatible, but the FSF doesn't. Nothing to see here, move along...
-- William Hooper