[debian-devel:12967] [FWD] Re: Updated Debian XFree86 4.x mini-FAQ and status report

[Taketoshi Sano <kgh12351@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

佐野＠浜松です。

 debian-x ML より回覧。Branden による XFree86 4.0.1 の実験的パッケージに
ついての現状報告。

 JP 的には特に最後の xfonts-cjk 関連の話が重要かと。
依存関係の設定がうまくいってないのかな ?

In <20001001173015.C11322@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
  on "Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:30:15 -0500',
   with "Updated Debian XFree86 4.x mini-FAQ and status report",
 Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> さん wrote:

> [1  <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> Feel free reproduce this mail anywhere you like.  Reply to the list
> <debian-x@lists.debian.org>.  Do not send mail to me privately.
> 
> * To use DRI you need a proper kernel version (not to mention a card
>   supported by current DRI code).  Unfortunately there is no official Linux
>   kernel with the proper support.  Use the latest 2.2.18pre or 2.4 test
>   kernels.
> 
> * There was a problem with the MIT-SHM (shared memory) extension at one
>   point in the phase2 Debian packages, but it has been resolved.
> 
> * The X Strike Force webpage is offline due to a disk crash, but it will be
>   back when the machine is recovered.  The unofficial XFree86 .debs are
>   available at <http://samosa.debian.org/~branden/woody/>.
> 
> * Where to send mails: this part is very important.
> 
>   * DON'T MAIL ME DIRECTLY ABOUT PROBLEMS WITH X.  This is not only
>     personally harassing since I've asked people thousands of times (plus
>     once in nearly every message I send to the Debian lists), but it keeps
>     other people who may have seen the same problem, or know of a fix, from
>     helping you.
>   * <debian-user@lists.debian.org> is the proper support list for problems
>     with the officially released Debian XFree86 packages (3.3.6).
>   * <debian-x@lists.debian.org> is not in general a user support list at all;
>     only Debian-specific problems with my XFree86 4.x test packages should
>     be sent here.  In other words, problems with the *packaging* belong
>     here.  Problems with X itself should go to the XFree86 lists.
>   * <newbie@xxxxxxxxxxx> is the proper support list for problems with XFree86
>     from users who don't know much about the X Window System, diagnosing
>     problems, or fixing them.  This includes most of the people who send me
>     private mail asking for help.
>   * <xpert@xxxxxxxxxxx> is the proper support list for problems with XFree86
>     from people who knowledgeable and motivated enough to help fix them
>     (by, e.g., compiling X themselves from source, trying different versions
>     from CVS to try and narrow down problems, or hacking source code
>     themselves).
>   * The packages I have made available of XFree86 4.x are not official, and
>     not stable.  I do not support upgrades between versions of these
>     unofficial packages.  If you have problems, downgrade to 3.3.6 or purge
>     the X packages before changing versions.  I *do* want to hear about
>     package overlaps and other problems experienced when installing the
>     phase2 .debs on a system "naked" of X, or when upgrading from official
>     3.3.6 packages.  Mail reports of such to <debian-x@lists.debian.org>.
>   * Impatience and complaining from people not motivated to contribute some
>     of their own effort to solve problems will delay, not speed, the
>     process of creating official debian packages for XFree86 4.x.  I'd like
>     to have stable packages of XFree86 4.x out myself.  Life would be
>     hunky-dory.  But they're just not ready yet.
>   * Stop complaining about the size of these experimental packages,
>     particularly xlibs-dev; they contain everything that they are supposed
>     to per Debian policy, and will get much smaller when I do the official
>     release because I will be stripping them.  I am presently not stripping
>     these packages because I am hoping some enterprising users might be
>     willing to help track down bugs by providing backtraces.  (In any case,
>     the gargantuan xlibs-dev package is not even necessary unless you're
>     compiling X clients -- but keep in mind that you MUST NOT compile
>     official Debian packages against these libraries until XFree86 4.x
>     .debs are officially released.)
> 
> Here is a list of issues that are delaying official Debian XFree86 4.x
> packages:
> 
>   * The Mesa problem (specifically, the lack of libGLU.so) really has to be
>     sorted out upstream if Debian is going to have a sensible handling of
>     Mesa in our distribution.  Alternatively, I can stop shipping the Mesa
>     stuff altogether in the XFree86 packages until support is ready, but
>     this will pretty much leave DRI out of the picture.  I'd appreciate
>     feedback on doing this.  The XFree86 versions of the Mesa and OSMesa
>     libraries can be added into woody at a later date without causing any
>     real disruption.  I'd appreciate feedback on the possibility of
>     releasing 4.0.1-1 (or 4.0.2-1, or whatever) without the XFree86 version
>     of Mesa.  What little feedback I've had so far indicates that people
>     would rather wait for upstream to resolve this, so that we ship XFree86
>     with its own version of libGLU.
>   * Another big issue is support for all of Debian's (released)
>     architectures.  This really sucks right now because I can't get patches
>     merged myself, Dan Jacobowitz (PowerPC), and Ben Collins (SPARC) are
>     both very busy with other things, and I'm staying on bleeding edge CVS
>     so it's impossible for these guys to keep up.  Portions of the
>     architecture-specific patches are being made to some of the most
>     volatile areas of the XFree86 source tree, and involve hairy stuff like
>     varying architecture-specific details in PCI bus management.  I really
>     don't like being i386-centric but upstream is changing very rapidly
>     right now, and it's hard to pick a flag day for Debian.  4.0.1 is
>     practically ancient by now.  Over four and a half megs of patches have
>     been applied upstream since then.
>   * I have merged the fonts previously in xfonts-cjk into the xfonts-base
>     package (in anticipation of extension of many of the fonts in the -base
>     package to include characters beyond those in ISO-8859-1).  However,
>     apt wants to *remove* xfonts-base entirely, leaving the old, obsolete
>     xfonts-cjk package.  This really sucks since I've got all the package
>     relationship fields correct per the Packaging Manual.  When I mentioned
>     this to Culus he waved his hands and started mumbling about
>     NP-completeness, which is what he usually does when someone finds a
>     problem with his problem resolver.
> 
> Thanks for listening.
> 
> -- 
> G. Branden Robinson             |    You should try building some of the
> Debian GNU/Linux                |    stuff in main that is modern...turning
> branden@debian.org              |    on -Wall is like turning on the pain.
> http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |    -- James Troup
> [2  <application/pgp-signature (7bit)>]

-- 
     ＃ (わたしのおうちは浜松市、「夜のお菓子」で有名さ。)
    <kgh12351@xxxxxxxxxxx> : Taketoshi Sano (佐野　武俊)