From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Nov 21 06:24:46 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id GAA23501 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:24:46 -0800 Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id GAA23496 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:24:42 -0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id GAA02879; Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:24:33 -0800 To: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" cc: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: option XSERVER deprecated? In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 21 Nov 1995 07:44:27 EDT." <199511211244.MAA03497@exalt.x.org> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 1995 06:24:33 -0800 Message-ID: <2876.816963873@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Assuming there are no reasons uncovered that make it impractical, I see no reason why not. You could even pass the commit through Rich. > > No, apparently not. I notice that the GENERIC config in 2.1.0R had > option XSERVER commented out. Yet a (very) cursory look at the kernel > sources shows that XSERVER is still used and pcvt* is built differently > when it's defined. > > (The X server did run on the GENERIC kernel just long enough build my > own kernel. I didn't try switching VTs though.) > > Can I suggest that the kernel use the opposite logic, i.e. assume there > will be an X server and build accordingly? And for those who don't run X > there should be an option NOXSERVER. > > If I did the work would it be accepted and incorporated into the next > release? > > -- > > Kaleb KEITHLEY > X Consortium