From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 7 00:38:04 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BD3E2B7 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 00:38:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.centurylink.net (mail.centurylink.net [205.219.233.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB54A1D0D for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 00:38:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=embarqmail.com; s=s012408; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@embarqmail.com; t=1389055081; h=From:Subject:Date:To:Mime-Version:Content-Type; bh=PJ3vpAvTPjb0qU4+/FdZdzKdgws=; b=ToJeTcrcCSZsPXIx6+Y72tYhKsRlg1vEs3iAf5OaLMx9NdZxcyj/ReGVWZDD2d/s AAQqtmpRaxJYfSTqJ7SJTo+DSCzHiGRb3vZpvtnSGMJZERdpkZ9eClUd6Mr5ZeR4; X_CMAE_Category: , , X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=eJKRfQV1 c=1 sm=1 a=3dn2BDQDCgitC1PfbxxZ7A==:17 a=fbsQ-NSFazEA:10 a=1poGYrevpj8A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=1oqGTYSLAAAA:8 a=QvdyvuOHXBoA:10 a=C8m1U-UNAAAA:8 a=D6SDFqAXrLMcdq7cVfIA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=tkA86bdKVfEA:10 a=mxCaZEcha5gA:10 a=3dn2BDQDCgitC1PfbxxZ7A==:117 X-CM-Score: 0 X-Scanned-by: Cloudmark Authority Engine Authentication-Results: smtp03.agate.dfw.synacor.com header.from=bsd-unix@embarqmail.com; sender-id=neutral Authentication-Results: smtp03.agate.dfw.synacor.com smtp.mail=bsd-unix@embarqmail.com; spf=neutral; sender-id=neutral Authentication-Results: smtp03.agate.dfw.synacor.com smtp.user=bsd-unix@embarqmail.com; auth=pass (LOGIN) Received-SPF: neutral (smtp03.agate.dfw.synacor.com: 71.3.82.230 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of embarqmail.com) Received: from [71.3.82.230] ([71.3.82.230:64047] helo=earth.milkyway.net) by smtp.centurylink.net (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 3.5.1.37854 r(Momo-dev:3.5.1.0)) with ESMTPA id 56/FC-19767-96C4BC25; Mon, 06 Jan 2014 19:38:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 19:38:00 -0500 From: Randy Pratt To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT for cairo 1.12 and 8.x survey Message-Id: <20140106193800.3b3dc86b878dc69453ff67f0@embarqmail.com> In-Reply-To: <52CAD9CA.1020304@rainbow-runner.nl> References: <52CAD9CA.1020304@rainbow-runner.nl> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.3.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; i386-portbld-freebsd8.4) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:38:04 -0000 On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 17:28:58 +0100 Koop Mast wrote: > Greetings! > > This is a weird call for testers. > > First off before the real CFT. We are interested if people are still > using 8.x for there desktop. Is there a specific reason for not updating > to 9.x or 10.x? > > So in our quest for push Xorg on FreeBSD further, we are looking for > people to test cairo 1.12 primarily with the old Xorg stack. We know > that the graphics with the 2.7.1 intel driver are horribly broken (lots > of artifacts) so people don't need to test that, but what is the state > of the other xorg video drivers with cairo 1.12? If problems arise after > the update, a screenshot and details about installed ports and your > hardware should be enough. But if your using the intel driver with old > xorg please chime in too, this will give us a beter idea about the user > base. I'm using 8.4-STABLE on a box which has the on-board intel graphics and uses the xorg-7.7 / xf86-video-intel-2.7.1_6 driver. It seems to work reasonably for a fluxbox desktop although I do see occasional artifacts. I never expect much from on-board video. The information at http://bsdstats.org/bt/releases.html might be helpful since it shows quite a few 8.x users. I was a little surprised that the intel driver usage was among the higher numbers (512) for drivers being reported ( http://bsdstats.org/ports.php?category=93 ). I'm dragging my feet on updating to 10.x because of the large block of time needed to rebuild everything or to do a new install. There's still some time left before EOL of 8.x ( June 30, 2015 ) so I suspect that there will be others that are slow to update. It was only the EOL of 6.x that pushed me to 8.x. I tend to live on the trailing-edge ;-) Randy