Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 3 Apr 1997 23:31:44 -0800 (PST)
From:      Doug White <dwhite@gdi.uoregon.edu>
To:        Bruce Albrecht <bruce@zuhause.mn.org>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: X and Release 2.2.1
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.970403233049.464o-100000@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <199704030602.AAA08863@zuhause.mn.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Bruce Albrecht wrote:

> I've seen some comments on this mailing list (or maybe freebsd-current) to
> the effect that the binary version of XFree86 was improperly built, and is
> really built against FreeBSD-current, which is really FreeBSD-3.0-current.
> I'm about to install FreeBSD for the first time.  I have the 2.1.6 CDROM, but
> I'm planning on ftp'ing the 2.2.1 release, and installing it.  Since I have
> a Matrox Millenium, I'd really like to install the XFree3.2A release.  Is
> this the version that was built incorrectly, or was XFree3.2 that was built
> against the wrong version?  Would I be better off installing 2.1.6 and
> waiting until the smoke clears for 2.2.1?  Should I install XFree 3.2 from
> scratch from the ports collection (and compile it myself), even though
> the performance is supposed to be much better for my graphics card in 3.2A?

You'll have to grab the 3.2A yourself from ftp://ftp.xfree86.org.  It
should be properly compiled.

Doug White                              | University of Oregon  
Internet:  dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu    | Residence Networking Assistant
http://gladstone.uoregon.edu/~dwhite    | Computer Science Major




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970403233049.464o-100000>