From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 31 11:04:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AA16106564A for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 11:04:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from kabab.cs.huji.ac.il (kabab.cs.huji.ac.il [132.65.16.84]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340A18FC24 for ; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 11:04:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danny@cs.huji.ac.il) Received: from pampa.cs.huji.ac.il ([132.65.80.32]) by kabab.cs.huji.ac.il with esmtp id 1LTDds-000E7d-Eb; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:04:04 +0200 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.2 To: Peter Jeremy In-reply-to: <20090130195311.GK1755@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <6B7ABE80-35AB-4C44-B5A4-200E10DCC3AC@airwired.net> <49819BD5.5040709@FreeBSD.org> <1233236412.1779.40.camel@wombat.2hip.net> <20090130195311.GK1755@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> Comments: In-reply-to Peter Jeremy message dated "Sat, 31 Jan 2009 06:53:11 +1100." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:04:04 +0200 From: Danny Braniss Message-ID: Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Robert Noland Subject: Re: Unhappy Xorg upgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 11:04:06 -0000 > As a general note, this is the second time in a row that an X.org > upgrade broke X for a significant number of people. IMO, this > suggests that our approach to X.org upgrades needs significant changes > (see below). X11 is a critical component for anyone who is using > FreeBSD as a desktop and having upgrades fail or come with significant > POLA violations and regressions for significant numbers of people is > not acceptable. > you took the words out of my mouth! Some days ago, I compiled wine from ports, among its dependencies was cups(why in the name of G_D?), and x11-xcb (which did not ring any special bells - stupidly I thought it meant some x11 cut buffer gizmo :-) Anyways, next day, I couldn't open windows (x11 not MS) from some hosts, some debuging later, it was xauth failing. Now xcb did ring bells! A year ago we found a bug in libxcb, where the treatment of xauth was broken, we sent a patch, but it is still waiting. BTW, I opend a PR, http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=131120, where it's now going the way the salmon, up stream, waiting for some kind sole to apply it. > On 2009-Jan-29 08:40:11 -0500, Robert Noland wrote: > >I've had patches available for probably a couple of months now posted to > >freebsd-x11@. For the few people who tested it, I had no real issues > >reported. > > I didn't recall seeing any reference to patches so I went looking. > All I could find is a couple of references to a patchset existing > buried inside threads discussing specific problems with X. The > majority of people who didn't have those specific problems probably > skipped the thread and never saw that a patchset was available. > > When the X.org 7.0 upgrade was planned, a heads-up went out on a > number of mailing lists, together with a pointer to the patchset and > upgrade instructions and the upgrade did not proceed until both a > reasonable number of people reported success and reported problems had > been ironed out. Given the ongoing problems with code provided by > X.org, I suggest that this approach needs to be followed for every > future release of X.org until (if) the X.org Project demonstrates that > they can provide release-quality code. > > > This update also brings in support for a > >lot of people who are running newer hardware. > > And breaks support for lots of people who used to have functional > X servers. > merging /usr/X11R6 into /usr/local was a bad idea! cheers, danny > --=20 > Peter Jeremy > Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement > an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour. > > --+1TulI7fc0PCHNy3 > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature > Content-Disposition: inline > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (FreeBSD) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkmDWqcACgkQ/opHv/APuIdisQCgogeNZ8aXPDJ3gcZ/23Gyp/CV > bmsAn0efyI9cS6TWGFkofoYh6oFmtc5l > =i2p0 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --+1TulI7fc0PCHNy3-- >