From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 0:37:58 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from smtp6.mindspring.com (smtp6.mindspring.com [207.69.200.110]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A633937B422; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca5-129.ix.netcom.com [209.109.234.129]) by smtp6.mindspring.com (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA10358; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:37:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e8A7alf18300; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:36:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Will Andrews Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default References: <200009091343.e89Dhg411508@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000909113351.O632@radon.gryphonsoft.com> From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 10 Sep 2000 00:36:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: Will Andrews's message of "Sat, 9 Sep 2000 11:33:51 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 12 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Will Andrews * I am still running XFree86 3.3.6 because things like Utah-GLX don't work * with 4.0.x, and 4.x still has a lot of GL issues. :-( * * Unless someone here has gone and made a hack to get around the fact that * XFree86-4 improperly installs GL includes and libraries (it doesn't * install all of them for some reason). Didn't sobomax make Mesa3 install only things missing from XFree86-4? Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 0:39: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A581537B422; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:39:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca5-129.ix.netcom.com [209.109.234.129]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA13737; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:38:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e8A7c2d18306; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:38:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Steve Price Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default References: <200009091343.e89Dhg411508@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000909171920.J2089@bonsai.hiwaay.net> From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 10 Sep 2000 00:37:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: Steve Price's message of "Sat, 9 Sep 2000 17:19:20 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 19 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Steve Price * On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 06:43:42AM -0700, Satoshi Asami wrote: * # Hi, * # * # What do you guys think about making XFree86-4-* the default now? With * # the split-up XFree86-4 ports and the xtt-* servers (which are * # basically 3.3.6 servers plus TrueType patches), I think everyone can * # have a reasonable system. * * The only concern that I would have is about all the complaints * about 4.x not supporting enough video cards besides being generally * buggy. I thought people with cards only supported in 3.3.6 can use xtt-* servers. Unless you give them some TrueType fonts, they will behave exactly the same as normal 3.3.6 servers. Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 0:42:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from tisch.mail.mindspring.net (tisch.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.157]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC7C337B422; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:42:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca5-129.ix.netcom.com [209.109.234.129]) by tisch.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA03827; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:41:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e8A7fLL18328; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:41:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Kris Kennaway Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default References: <200009091343.e89Dhg411508@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000909155557.B40986@freefall.freebsd.org> From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 10 Sep 2000 00:40:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: Kris Kennaway's message of "Sat, 9 Sep 2000 15:55:57 -0700" Message-ID: Lines: 20 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Kris Kennaway * AFAIK they still havent added the setuid wrapper which may protect from * any other buffer overflows in the server binary. They also havent added * back PAM support which is in 3.x. People concerned about security of the server can continue using the 3.3.6 (xtt-*) servers. I didn't know about PAM -- do you have any idea what we can do about it? (I.e., how long will it take for someone like you to add it back? :) * Actually we are talking about doing a net-only 4.1.5 release in a few * weeks to make use of the fact that SSH now works properly by default. Actually, since RSA is free now, we can do 4.1.5 immediately, right? We can change the XFree86 default right after that. Jordan, what are your thoughts about the 4.1.5 release schedule? Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 0:51:37 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A18037B422; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:51:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id AAA06098; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:51:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:51:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 10 Sep 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > People concerned about security of the server can continue using the > 3.3.6 (xtt-*) servers. I didn't know about PAM -- do you have any > idea what we can do about it? (I.e., how long will it take for > someone like you to add it back? :) Well, I'd prefer the list of "people concerned about security of the server" to include the ports wraith :-) It's not going to help us if theres another vulnerability discovered in X 4 which could have been prevented by an xwrapper. As for PAM, I suspect it would require an understanding of the access and authentication mechanisms in X, which I don't have. > Actually, since RSA is free now, we can do 4.1.5 immediately, right? Yep. John Baldwin was talking about doing a QA cycle anyway, and the target date of Sep 21 seemed later than he was wanting anyway. Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 0:59:55 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from blount.mail.mindspring.net (blount.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8090C37B422; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca5-129.ix.netcom.com [209.109.234.129]) by blount.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA02336; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 03:59:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id e8A7xi118484; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:59:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami) To: Kris Kennaway Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default References: From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 10 Sep 2000 00:59:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: Kris Kennaway's message of "Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:51:34 -0700 (PDT)" Message-ID: Lines: 25 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.7 Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * From: Kris Kennaway * Well, I'd prefer the list of "people concerned about security of the * server" to include the ports wraith :-) It's not going to help us if * theres another vulnerability discovered in X 4 which could have been * prevented by an xwrapper. Sorry, your Ports Wraith just upgraded to 4.0.1 and is happily running an setuid XFree86.... ;) Kidding aside, if you think it is really necessary, why don't we include Xwrapper from 3.3.6 (we can make a separate port for this) as a requirement for a 4.0.1 Xserver? Will that work? * As for PAM, I suspect it would require an understanding of the access and * authentication mechanisms in X, which I don't have. Hmm. * Yep. John Baldwin was talking about doing a QA cycle anyway, and the * target date of Sep 21 seemed later than he was wanting anyway. What do you say, John? :) Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 1:27:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C152637B424; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 01:27:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id BAA09968; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 01:27:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 01:27:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, qa@FreeBSD.org, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 10 Sep 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > Sorry, your Ports Wraith just upgraded to 4.0.1 and is happily running > an setuid XFree86.... ;) > > Kidding aside, if you think it is really necessary, why don't we > include Xwrapper from 3.3.6 (we can make a separate port for this) as > a requirement for a 4.0.1 Xserver? Will that work? Nope :-( Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-qa Sun Sep 10 9:12:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-qa@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [208.42.49.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6CBD37B423; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by gw.nectar.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C356C1925A; Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:12:52 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:12:52 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Greg Lehey Cc: Satoshi Asami , ports@FreeBSD.ORG, qa@FreeBSD.ORG, taguchi@tohoku.iij.ad.jp Subject: Re: Making XFree86-4 the default Message-ID: <20000910111252.C9690@spawn.nectar.com> References: <200009091343.e89Dhg411508@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000910101026.B15703@wantadilla.lemis.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <20000910101026.B15703@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@lemis.com on Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 10:10:27AM +0930 X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/ Sender: owner-freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 10:10:27AM +0930, Greg Lehey wrote: > I can't address the bugginess issues, except to say that they don't > seem to be biting me. Same here... happily running XFree86 4 since way-back around 3.9.16 :-) with multiple monitors. First with multiple Matrox Millenium II cards, then since the `Linux' driver was released by Matrox I've been using the G400 Dual-Head. Oh, also on my laptop (Neomagic) -- both using Type 1 and TrueType font support that is built-in. Also I'm using OpenGL + the Mesa port quite happily, though I haven't tried the tdfx stuff with my Voodoo2 card yet. I've not found XFree86 4 any more buggy than any other X server. Modulo setuid paranoia and possible card support, there seems to be no reason to use XFree86 3. -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message