From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 29 10:11:21 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D848106568F for ; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:11:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erikt@midgard.homeip.net) Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net (ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net [80.76.149.213]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C93E8FC0A for ; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:11:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c83-255-48-78.bredband.comhem.se ([83.255.48.78]:54841 helo=falcon.midgard.homeip.net) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1NPYnT-0002sv-9X for freebsd-x11@freebsd.org; Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:55:26 +0100 Received: (qmail 14986 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2009 10:55:21 +0100 Received: from owl.midgard.homeip.net (10.1.5.7) by falcon.midgard.homeip.net with ESMTP; 29 Dec 2009 10:55:21 +0100 Received: (qmail 91688 invoked by uid 1001); 29 Dec 2009 10:55:21 +0100 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:55:21 +0100 From: Erik Trulsson To: "Ronald F. Guilmette" Message-ID: <20091229095521.GA91357@owl.midgard.homeip.net> References: <82913.1262078703@tristatelogic.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <82913.1262078703@tristatelogic.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Originating-IP: 83.255.48.78 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1NPYnT-0002sv-9X. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1NPYnT-0002sv-9X 5f4d9e51ff3e685a358f8eb09c3db1e8 Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default configuration for xorg-drivers (WTF?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 10:11:21 -0000 On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 01:25:03AM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > > I confess. I haven't been keeing my ports at all up-to-date. (And this has > already caused me grief in at least one instance.) Today I have been trying > to rectify that, but I ran into a bit of a problem when I did: > > portupgrade -rR xorg-drivers > > A couple of hours later I'm staring at these errors: > > ---> Skipping 'x11-drivers/xorg-drivers' (xorg-drivers-7.3_3) because a requisite package 'xf86-video-cyrix-1.1.0_2' (x11-drivers/xf86-video-cyrix) failed (specify -k to force) > ** Listing the failed packages (-:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) > - x11-drivers/xf86-video-nsc (marked as IGNORE) > - x11-drivers/xf86-video-imstt (marked as IGNORE) > - x11-drivers/xf86-video-cyrix (marked as IGNORE) > - x11-drivers/xf86-video-via (marked as IGNORE) > * x11-drivers/xorg-drivers (xorg-drivers-7.3_3) > > So OK. I get it. The xorg-drivers port wants all of these other chipset- > specific drivers, some of which ain't in a buildable state right at the > moment. Fine OK. I understand. But ummm.... if those drivers ain't > buildable right now, does it really make a lot of sense to leave them > *selected* as part of the *default* configuration for xorg-drivers ?? The *default* configuration for xorg-drivers is actually that those drivers are not selected. You probably set the configuration at some time in the past, and that selection is now used instead of the defaults. > > Call me dense, but hope somebody can explain to me how this makes sense. > > So anyway, after googling around for good twenty minutes (cuz when it comes > to either ports or X11, I don't know my own ass from my elbow) I learned > that I had to manually cd into /usr/ports/x11-drivers/xorg-drivers and then > "make config" and select the driver(s) I actualy needed, and *de-select* > all of the (broken) ones listed above as "IGNORE". Fine. No problem. > Even _I_ can do that. But ummm... wait just a second... oh s**t! My > motherboad uses the VIA M8M890 northbridge, so I _do_ need that bleedin' > VIA driver. > > So I google around another ten minutes or so and (luckily) I then come > across this: > > http://groups.google.com/group/lucky.freebsd.ports/msg/b40b3298710a3086 > > OK. So I get it. Use "openchrome" instead of "via". No sweat. > > But ummm...... Why is it that in the current up-to-date files relating to > the xorg-drivers port, the openchrome driver is, by default, *de-selected*? The default for xorg-drivers is that openchrome is selected and via is not selected. > > Should I be worried? No. You just have an old config selection lying around that overrides the default. > > Is there something broken about the current openchrome driver? > > Don't an awful lot of people (like me) need SOME sort of a driver for > VIA-based graphics? If so, then why the bleep doesn't the default > config for xorg-drivers provide any such? > > Since I was already trusting enough (stupid enough?) to proceed with my > port upgrade to xorg-drivers-7.4_2 (WITH openchrome & WITHOUT the old > VIA driver), upon my next reboot, and I going to be staring at a blank > screen? > > I sure hope not. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-x11@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-x11 > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se