From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 29 19:53:33 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D49016A41F;
	Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bfoz@bfoz.net)
Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B493943D46;
	Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:32 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bfoz@bfoz.net)
Received: from [192.168.0.5] (c-24-6-134-233.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[24.6.134.233])
	by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with ESMTP
	id <20050729195331012006ckpne>; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:31 +0000
Message-ID: <42EA8939.107@bfoz.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:53:29 -0700
From: Brandon Fosdick <bfoz@bfoz.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050721)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_K=F6nig?= <bkoenig@cs.tu-berlin.de>
References: <42EA7048.7050006@bfoz.net> <42EA8696.8020307@cs.tu-berlin.de>
In-Reply-To: <42EA8696.8020307@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: ports@freebsd.org, olgeni@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Eterm transparency/shading problem
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:53:33 -0000

Ah, that makes sense. I usually compile Eterm with MMX enabled but somehow forgot this time. Now it looks much better.

Would it be worthwhile to make this compile option part of that new(?) options framework that some of the ports seem to be using?

Thanks for the reply.

Björn König wrote:
> Brandon Fosdick wrote:
> 
>> I just cvsup'd ports the other day and rebuilt Eterm, now the 
>> transparency/shading option tints everything blue, regardless of the 
>> actual settings. Previously I had "cmod 160" and it made the 
>> background about %50 shaded, as expected. Any idea what happened, or 
>> how to fix this?
>>
>> Apparently I'm not the only one with this problem, but I don't see any 
>> responses.
>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/2005-February/078221.html 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a bug in Eterm and it has been fixed in the upcoming next 
> release of Eterm.
> 
> To solve this problem now you either need to compile it with MMX 
> support, e.g.
> 
>   make -DWITH_MMX install clean
> 
> or in case your machine has no support for MMX put the quick patch that 
> I attached to this mail into /usr/ports/x11/eterm/files/ and build Eterm 
> as usual.