Posted by
michael
on from the thanks-for-all-the-fish-screensavers dept.
Nirbo writes "FreeBSD switches to X.Org, The 'HEADSUP' can be found here, and on the -x11, -current, and -ports mailing lists. Very good news for those FreeBSD users who have either changed to X.Org in anticipation, or have been waiting in hope for this momentous change."
So what will become of xfree?
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Everyone seems to be moving to xorg now. Where does this leave xfree? Not that I'm worried about it or anything.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
automatic configuration
by
bcrowell
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
As a FreeBSD desktop user, I'm happy about this simply because of the easier configuration of X windows, regardless of the political aspects. (Well, I'm happy about that, too, since the licensing change of XF86 seemed bogus.) Configuring X has been one of the few remaining big barriers for both Linux and FreeBSD on the desktop.
Too bad that you can't upgrade an existing system without using portupgrade, though. I hate to see portupgrade drifting closer and closer to being a required part of the system. I've had a lot of bad (system-breaking) experiences with it.
The lesson of X11....
by
evenprime
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The lesson of X11 is that you can be the most popular piece of software on every distribution, and it still doesn't give you the power to play dictator with your licence. If you put unneccessary restrictions in your licence, someone will fork your code and the community will embrace them, not you. You would think that people would have figured that out after the ssh/openssh split. Now we have another example in windowing systems....
--
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
Re:The lesson of X11....
by
edhall
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I don't think this shift is entirely a license issue.
I was chatting with one of the FreeBSD core team guys
around the time the decision was being made, and he felt that the frustration of getting fixes fed back into the XFree86 code base in a timely manner was a big part of the motivation. And this certainly isn't the first time I've heard complaints of XFree86 foot-dragging by the FreeBSD folks.
I guess you might say it's all of a piece -- the XFree86 user community simply didn't find the developers responsive (whether on license or technology), and when X.org proved a viable alternative, they voted with their feet.
-Ed
Re:The lesson of X11....
by
XO
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Although definitely not like any other build procedure I have ever seen in the free software world, X is probably the one piece of software that I have never had ANY problems whatsoever in building, re-building, installing, re-installing, etc.
Though I did have a big ass problem with Debian refusing to let apt do it's things the right way when I "broke" the X installation by installing a source-built XFree 4.3.0 over the then-Debian-supplied XFree 4.2.0. This is when I discovered that (a) dpkg sucks (b) Debian's X installation is a spaghetti mess (c) it's virtually impossible to remove XFree packages from a Debian installation and not remove every other program that uses X on the system, which is why I had to just plain install source-built XF over the top of the Debian installed one.
On the bright side, every time apt- would hork the XFree installation by changes having happened to the Debian files during an apt-get, a simple "make World" made my entire X installation back to the way it was supposed to be.
Now, on the other hand, I've never even cracked the bindings of XFree source. I imagine, that it's probably a myriad of horrible hacked crap dating back 10-15 years or more in several places. I imagine that it's a completely unmaintainable nightmare. And I also completely understand that there was virtually NO development happening beyond bug fixes and the occasional tweak type enhancement to XFree. XF 4 was a major update but that was still like 2 years ago. 4.1, 4.2 were mostly bug fixes, 4.3 completed some of th features for 4.0, and fixed more bugs.
I'm really curious as to if there are any differences between X.org and XFree86 in th software, yet?
-- "Champagne for my real friends - and real pain for my sham friends!"
http://ericblade.postalboard.com/
Who is left...?
by
bogaboga
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Yes, Slashdotters, which among the major distros is left? Anyone know whether X.org is doing anything about the [horrible] Linux fonts found in major default Linux installs? I have always had to install M$ fonts or run the webfonts.sh script to get decent fonts. This is shameful! The Linux gurus create a world class OS but have not yet made fonts for Linux? What do you think?
Re:Tobes Of Hades Lit By Flickering Torchlight
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.
Name change...
by
CaptainPinko
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I know this is stupid but I'm glad for the name change of the X-server that ever is using. Because it always seemed weird to be running XFree86 on a PPC It's nice that the new standard has an architecture neutral name. I'm assuming the 86 came from x86.
-- Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
Anyone for the Fifth Element?
by
GumphMaster
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Been done before I'm afraid. The 'evil monster' in The Fifth Element is Dr. Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg.
-- Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
Re:Short Domain
by
wfberg
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I guess to beat that, you'd need to go with a country code domain.
ai and dk should work. Due to DNS weirdness you might need to add a dot, as in ai. and dk.
The license change was really just a way of prompting everyone to move on, while not completely abandoning them.
Thats all just my guess, take it or leave it.
Re:What about Apple?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
The consistent interface is not a property of the proprietary GUI - they could have built a similarly consistent interface on top of X or X+DPS, like, er, NeXTSTEP did. X is much lower level than such concerns, and specifies mechanism, not policy (mostly... the one thing that always gets me is the "one mouse pointer" rule... I used to _like_ Amiga hacks providing multiple mouse pointers...).
The beautiful eye candy is partially as a result of the absolute control apple exercise over their GUI, but there is no technical reason why similar eye candy isn't possible with development of X extensions, as freedesktop.org is demonstrating. Whether it would have been in apple's interest to go in the X direction is another matter - basically, they would have ended up paying for X's enhancement.
In summary: Don't confuse X and the toolkits on top of X...
Speaking as a (l)user with an nVidia Riva128 video card (yes, I know
it's old and it sucks and I should get a new one; you may be seated), I
have experienced frustration in the recent past, when XFree86 4.3.x was
limping toward 4.4.0: XFree86 4.2.x had annoying bugs which
unfortunately I can't now remember; the Riva128 driver in the 4.3.99
prerelease packages was broken, and the only way to get a working one
was to use a CVS snapshot; but getting the CVS snapshots working with
any sort of stability was, to put it politely, a challenge.
From the small amount of correspondence I had on the XFree86 mailing
list, the devs seemed rather frustrated at the way things were dragging
along, and not just with a video driver for a ratty little video card
that three people still use. While I'm still mainly using XFree86 for
the moment, I'm definitely watching Xorg with interest.
Re:Short Domain
by
kasperd
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Re:So XFree Is Dead then
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Actually the GPL is made so that companies can give code to the public to use but if another company wants to make money off of the source code your company developed then they have to negotiate with you for a license. The point of the GPL is that you aren't giving away your copyrights to the software. You keep your copyrights, and in addition can make money off of companies that need your source code. Pretty much what I think is this, BSD is open source for suckers and there are a lot of them out there. Pretty much if you release under the BSD you will never see money for the work you did. Essentially the BSD license is the real license of communists and I think people like you who try to pretend its not are just pissed off because people won't give you a free ride. Pretending that the GPL is for people who want software to be free isn't a good way to make remarks. You should understand that the GPL is another way to restrict competition. If people steal your work you have legal options to sue for money. With BSD what can you do but pretend you like to give away your money for free when a company steals your work. So think of it like this, if a company wants to use your code which would you rather license your code with if you don't mind letting people use it for free (who don't have the money or don't plan to profit from your work) and still want to make money when larger companies want to use your code as their own? BSD doesn't work in this situation and never will.
I stronly disagree with your statements...
by
Saem
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
BSD is the antithesis of competition. LGPL is the anti-competition, tis the ultimate of truces.
Look at the BSDs, their greatness is achieved through entities (the groups) pursuing goals which may produce overlap work. But they SHARE, with little ego for the most part.
If you think about it, it's not competition that drives them, it's cooperation and out right, striving, for the betterment of all that they can effect and themselves. There are more things, but currently, at least to my limited ability to express myself, remain ineffable.
Additionally, if not tangentially, how many different versions of Linux do we have, not distros or backported kernels for some of those distros, but actual, different kernels? Why is Linus' Linux basically the main one?
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone seems to be moving to xorg now. Where does this leave xfree? Not that I'm worried about it or anything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Too bad that you can't upgrade an existing system without using portupgrade, though. I hate to see portupgrade drifting closer and closer to being a required part of the system. I've had a lot of bad (system-breaking) experiences with it.
Find free books.
The lesson of X11 is that you can be the most popular piece of software on every distribution, and it still doesn't give you the power to play dictator with your licence. If you put unneccessary restrictions in your licence, someone will fork your code and the community will embrace them, not you. You would think that people would have figured that out after the ssh/openssh split. Now we have another example in windowing systems....
"Weapons should be hardy rather than decorative" - Miyamoto Musashi
I think that goes for OS's too
Yes, Slashdotters, which among the major distros is left? Anyone know whether X.org is doing anything about the [horrible] Linux fonts found in major default Linux installs? I have always had to install M$ fonts or run the webfonts.sh script to get decent fonts. This is shameful! The Linux gurus create a world class OS but have not yet made fonts for Linux? What do you think?
Good News Everyone!
Mike Smith now works for Apple, who's OS is based on BSD.
Check it out: www.lemis.com/~grog/msmr.html
and at: daemonnews, under "BSD at Apple"
He didn't like the direction that v5 was taking so he quit and starting writing BSD code for Apple.
I know this is stupid but I'm glad for the name change of the X-server that ever is using. Because it always seemed weird to be running XFree86 on a PPC It's nice that the new standard has an architecture neutral name. I'm assuming the 86 came from x86.
Your CPU is not doing anything else, at least do something.
Been done before I'm afraid. The 'evil monster' in The Fifth Element is Dr. Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg.
Patent litigation: A doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction... in which everyone seems willing to push the button
I guess to beat that, you'd need to go with a country code domain.
ai and dk should work.
Due to DNS weirdness you might need to add a dot, as in ai. and dk.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
More details on this story are in my appendix The Cautionary Tale of XFree86, part of my essay Make Your Open Source Software GPL-Compatible. Or Else.
- David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
I think they wanted this to happen. Search old /. stories for 'xfree86' and see what I mean.
First, XFree86 Core Team Disbands, then X.org and XFree86 Reform. Then a week later, XFree86 Alters License. I realise the 'merger' turned out to be more of an exodus, but I think the project was ready to die anyway.
The license change was really just a way of prompting everyone to move on, while not completely abandoning them.
Thats all just my guess, take it or leave it.
The consistent interface is not a property of the proprietary GUI - they could have built a similarly consistent interface on top of X or X+DPS, like, er, NeXTSTEP did. X is much lower level than such concerns, and specifies mechanism, not policy (mostly... the one thing that always gets me is the "one mouse pointer" rule... I used to _like_ Amiga hacks providing multiple mouse pointers...).
The beautiful eye candy is partially as a result of the absolute control apple exercise over their GUI, but there is no technical reason why similar eye candy isn't possible with development of X extensions, as freedesktop.org is demonstrating. Whether it would have been in apple's interest to go in the X direction is another matter - basically, they would have ended up paying for X's enhancement.
In summary: Don't confuse X and the toolkits on top of X...
Speaking as a (l)user with an nVidia Riva128 video card (yes, I know it's old and it sucks and I should get a new one; you may be seated), I have experienced frustration in the recent past, when XFree86 4.3.x was limping toward 4.4.0: XFree86 4.2.x had annoying bugs which unfortunately I can't now remember; the Riva128 driver in the 4.3.99 prerelease packages was broken, and the only way to get a working one was to use a CVS snapshot; but getting the CVS snapshots working with any sort of stability was, to put it politely, a challenge.
From the small amount of correspondence I had on the XFree86 mailing list, the devs seemed rather frustrated at the way things were dragging along, and not just with a video driver for a ratty little video card that three people still use. While I'm still mainly using XFree86 for the moment, I'm definitely watching Xorg with interest.
ai and dk should work.
I just create a list with all the short ones I could find that actually resolve.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
Actually the GPL is made so that companies can give code to the public to use but if another company wants to make money off of the source code your company developed then they have to negotiate with you for a license. The point of the GPL is that you aren't giving away your copyrights to the software. You keep your copyrights, and in addition can make money off of companies that need your source code. Pretty much what I think is this, BSD is open source for suckers and there are a lot of them out there. Pretty much if you release under the BSD you will never see money for the work you did. Essentially the BSD license is the real license of communists and I think people like you who try to pretend its not are just pissed off because people won't give you a free ride. Pretending that the GPL is for people who want software to be free isn't a good way to make remarks. You should understand that the GPL is another way to restrict competition. If people steal your work you have legal options to sue for money. With BSD what can you do but pretend you like to give away your money for free when a company steals your work. So think of it like this, if a company wants to use your code which would you rather license your code with if you don't mind letting people use it for free (who don't have the money or don't plan to profit from your work) and still want to make money when larger companies want to use your code as their own? BSD doesn't work in this situation and never will.
BSD is the antithesis of competition. LGPL is the anti-competition, tis the ultimate of truces. Look at the BSDs, their greatness is achieved through entities (the groups) pursuing goals which may produce overlap work. But they SHARE, with little ego for the most part. If you think about it, it's not competition that drives them, it's cooperation and out right, striving, for the betterment of all that they can effect and themselves. There are more things, but currently, at least to my limited ability to express myself, remain ineffable. Additionally, if not tangentially, how many different versions of Linux do we have, not distros or backported kernels for some of those distros, but actual, different kernels? Why is Linus' Linux basically the main one?