Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mandrakelinux Goes X.org

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the teaching-a-lesson dept.

dvalin writes "With Mandrakelinux now going for X.org it seems like every big linux distributor now has officialy dumped XFree86. First release for cooker was announced on the changelog list the 7th of June: http://archives.mandrakelinux.com/changelog/2004-0 6/msg00799.php Nice to see for all us cookers out there:) Also on another note, Mandrakelinux has also switched to gcc-3.4 now"

8 of 363 comments (clear)

  1. Re:xorg changes by TEMM · · Score: 5, Informative

    People are switching to X.org due to liscence incompatbilities of XFree86 with the GPL.

  2. Actually... by ciroknight · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, Xorg is just a fork of XFree86 right before the licence change.

    --
    "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
  3. Re:and this means? by colinleroy · · Score: 5, Informative

    This page probably can.

    --
    blah
  4. Long Story/Short story by p.rican · · Score: 5, Informative

    Xorg is a fork of XFree86 due to a change in licensing on XFree86 software. Apparently the XFree license has had a 'marketing/advertising' clause added to it which may make it incompatible with the GPL. That was the straw that broke the camel's back..... From what I've read, their has been a lot of friction for a long time between XFree leadership and development community for various reasons (too many to list here). You can get the details about Xorg from here.

    --

    /. --"Demented and sad....but social" -Judd Nelson

  5. Re:XF86Config-4 by colinleroy · · Score: 5, Informative
    Basically, after having upgraded to X.org, your distro will have taken care of the init scripts found in /etc/X11/ and all you'll have to do is
    mv /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 /etc/X11/xorg.conf
    and replace /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/ with /usr/share/fonts/ in said file, to reflect the font path change.
    --
    blah
  6. Re:What is going on with the BSD's by DreadSpoon · · Score: 5, Informative

    OpenBSD for one is likely to change. They were one of the biggest opponents of the new XFree86 license.

    The reasoning for why the new license sucks has absolutely nothing to do with the GPL, despite the uninformed ramblings of the Slashdot crowd. It has to do with practicality. The new XFree86 license is almost impossible to follow depending on your interpretation. The license itself is unclear, and instead of fixing the wording, XFree86 leaders have just made informal statements on mailing lists regarding their own personal interpretation.

    The new license is impractical because it requires that attribution to be given to the XFree86 developers wherever any other attribution is given to another party. OpenBSD's complaint was with CD covers. Say you put a "Artwork provided by Foo Bob" on the CD insert. Now, according to some interpretations of the XFree86 license (and these are valid interpretations, because the license wording is very ambiguous and vague) you'd also have to put there in the same font size and prominance, "X Window system provided by XFree86, Inc." Then, if a contributor adds some stuff to the project under the same license, you have to add their name as well. And the next contributor. And so on. Pretty soon you run out of space to put all of these. There's also potential for the license to "spread" as people lift code, resulting a wide variety of apps with hundreds if not thousands of authors that have this incredibly stupid licensing stipulation.

    The XFree86 developers have stated that the above scenario is not their intention. But what they say doesn't matter much, because the above is pretty much exactly what the license text implies.

  7. Re:xorg changes by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Informative
    Nope. Actually, the GPL requires credit be given if the program is interactive and the version you're modifying already prints a copyright message:
    2c: If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)
    The major issue with the XFree86 license is that it is more specific about how the credit should be given. The ironic thing is that people using GPL'd forks were probably the only bunch that were required to give credit before this issue, given that XFree86 is indeed interactive, and does print a copyright message when it starts.
    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  8. Re:What does this mean for upgrading? by Stephen+Williams · · Score: 5, Informative

    If X.ORG is marked as conflicting with XFree86, then apt will uninstall XFree86 for me -- along with everything that depends on it. KDE, Gnome, all my X applications... ack!

    Assuming you're using Debian (since you mentioned apt), those packages don't depend on XFree86. They depend on one or more of the X11 library packages, which at present are built from the XFree86 sources. A hypothetical future Debianized x.org will provide the same packages, thus ensuring that the dependencies continue to be satisfied. No applications should require rebuilding, because the XFree86 libraries and x.org libraries provide the same API.

    Personally, I'm not touching x.org until it gets as far as Debian's testing stream. The XFree86 server and libraries in Debian testing Work For Me(tm), so I'm in no hurry to replace them just because.

    -Stephen