Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 08:37:07 +1000 From: Warren <shinjii@virusinfo.rdksupportinc.com> To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Daniel O'Connor <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Subject: Re: Portupgrade in Xfree86 pkg failed Message-ID: <200506260837.08911.shinjii@virusinfo.rdksupportinc.com> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEENFFBAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEENFFBAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 7:45 am, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > But the plain fact of the matter is that the Open Source community > isn't going to tolerate what xfree86 tried doing, and the users of > open source, which is you and I, are not served by splitting development > between 2 forks of X Windows. The amount of new video hardware that is > coming out and needs drivers is increasing, drivers are getting more and > more complex to write, and manufacturers are just as bad as they always > have been about assisting in video driver development. The sooner that > xfree86 goes away and dies the better for the community in the long > run. I dont want to get in the middle of a pissing contest yous seem to have going as to who is right or wrong or which X should be kept. The fact is i simply wished to know why the pkg was failing and how to correct it, nothing more nothing less. -- Yours Sincerely Shinjii http://www.shinji.nq.nu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506260837.08911.shinjii>