Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Experiences with X.org's X11 Server?

Posted by Cliff on from the have-you-gotten-it-to-work-yet dept.

Slashdot Reader CanadianCrackPot decided to be adventurous and went and installed the latest offering from X.org's X-Server project. Below, you'll find "the basics" of his "first attempt to install [their] X Window Server on a system with a 450 MHz PIII, and Diamond Viper V770 (TNT2 chipset) graphics card, running Mandrake 10.0 Official (FTP download of everything but the RPMS.cooker dir)." To make a long story short, while he did have some luck with installing it, running it was...problematic. He asks: "I'm just wondering how other Slashdot readers are doing with the new X11R6 server, and more importantly, how did you install it?" "I decided to try installing X.org's X Server today while I had nothing to do here's the results:
  • get a test bed system: check
  • get sources: check
  • ./configure: N/A...I'm worried
  • make World: check
  • make install; make install.man: check
  • startx: crash
  • xf86config: check
  • startx, again: check -- now I need a manager
  • startgnome: galeon not found (crash)
  • startkde: crash"
If you've had any luck getting X.org's X-server running on your machine, what hurdles did you have to overcome before it worked?

1 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. doing it on debian by pondering+llama · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm using debian sid on a dell inspiron 1100 -- first off, getting linux alive on this machine isn't the easiest, and Dell seem to be on a mission to break things with every BIOS release. Oddly enough the bios is on revision 29, and the last revision broke my ability to halt the system. But I digress.

    After seeing that distros like mandrake were getting in on the x.org action, i also had a look.

    I only had 2 issues:

    1. xdm wouldn't compile -- so i removed it from the makefile, since i don't use xdm
    2. make install didn't run ldconfig, which meant that x was horribly broken the first few times i ran it until i figured out from an strace that programs like glxinfo were looking for .so's where they weren't. Running ldconfig sorted out the problem.

    My experiences have, so far, been ok with x.org's version. Quake3 framerates seem at least as good, perhaps a little better than xfree86, and glxgears reports higher framerates than I remember under xfree. Startup is a little quicker, and X in general seems a little snappier. I don't know how much to attribute to the fact that the running version of X was compiled from source and the original version was binary installed from a .deb. But, purely on an ethical level, I am happy with x.org's version, and I will try it on my desktop when I get back home -- I know the q3 response on that machine a lot better, and that will give me a more accurate feel for x.org's version.