Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Fedora Prepares For Xorg Instead of XFree86

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the sea-change-or-teapot-tempest dept.

491

ZuperDee writes "I noticed in the development branch of Fedora today that they appear to be in the process of creating new xorg RPMs, and from the looks of the changelogs in those RPMs, it looks like their ultimate plan is to switch from XFree86 to the XOrg Foundation's implementation of X11. Anyone else here think this could signal the beginning of a new trend in Linux distributions, and that XOrg could end up becoming the new de-facto X11 implementation?" (See this earlier story,too.)

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST POST (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592870)

or maybe i fail it. who knows? not me.

John "Eff'ing" Kerry (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592950)

WHY DID JOHN KERRY OPPOSE FUNDING OUR TROOPS?

Did it have anything to do with all the war crimes he accused them of committing in Vietnam during Congressional testimony in 1971???

And why did he throw military medals away during a mall peace riot in 1971 --- SOMEBODY ELSE'S?

Re:John "Eff'ing" Kerry (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593117)

Because he's not a fascist asshole like Herr Bush! Heil Bush!

Yes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592872)

Everyone is aware of Red Hat's intentions. GTK and XOrg work well together. XOrg are innovative, while X just plain sucks.

Re:Yes (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593124)

Well, that was an informative two sentences.
Can we get something more substantial than 'plain sucks'?
I know that X11 is a protocol, defining an abstraction of a user interface, "mechanism, not policy", so that there a metric booty-load of libraries wrap it and expose it to various other technologies.
Apparently, the XFree86 core fascists ran out of cool points, so the Open Source community has been fragmenting at a rate that must have certain Monlopoly Sycophants oozing glee in the Northwest.
Can someone with insight explain what the issues are with X11 and the XFree86 group?
It's a good thing that there is a leader like Linus in kernel-land; while there are enough alternative patchsets in circulation to keep the ideas flowing, there is no doubt as to the HMFIC on the project.
Or GCC (Is that RMS personally? If not, indirectly) over in compiler-land.
If the GUI people, from X11 through Gnome/KDE, could behave in as unified a fashion...

first post? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592884)

first post!

drivers (4, Interesting)

prockcore (543967) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592885)

I don't know enough about Xorg to know if this is good or not.

Is the driver support there? Will NVidia's and ATI's binary drivers work with the Xorg server? It could be a real problem if FC2 won't be able to do accelerated 3d under NVidia or ATI cards.

Re:drivers (3, Insightful)

Fallen Kell (165468) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592917)

That is what I am wondering as well. Supposedly, if their drivers are built to the X11 spec, then I would think they would be easy to port over without much trouble. If, however they have all kinds of hooks into XFree86 specific libraries, then there might be problems.

Re:drivers (4, Insightful)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593113)

I don't see why. Isn't it possible to find out what hooks they have and then port the old XFree86 code over? Or would the DMCA prevent us from finding out what hooks are called?

Re:drivers (5, Informative)

Lussarn (105276) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592920)

The X.org server is basically a branch from Xfree just before the licence change. They should be very similiar at this point.

Re:drivers (1, Informative)

metallikop (649953) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593207)

Yes, they're very similar but X.org is mainly a testbed for ideas. That's fine and all, but X.org doesn't even have a stable branch. I've tried it out and it runs a bit slow right now, and a refhresh rate of 60hz is kinda hard on the eyes. Last I checked that's what you were stuck with.

Re:drivers (1)

Jellybob (597204) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593237)

It wouldn't matter anyway :P

I could never get ATI's binary drivers to work with the FC2 test, and switched back to FC1

fuck yuo all on teh spoke (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592887)

cxzzxc

RE: Drivers (5, Informative)

Professor Cool Linux (759581) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592895)

this is a fork so it should be compatible

American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592897)

You Americans should be ashamed of yourselves!

Detainees at Guantanamo Bay are shackled for up to 15 hours at a time in hand and leg cuffs with metal links which cut into the skin. Their "cells" are wire cages with concrete floors and open to the elements - giving no privacy or protection from the rats, snakes and scorpions loose around the base. By contrast the camp guard dogs have wooden houses with air conditioning and green grass to exercise on. A diet of foul water and food up to 10 years out-of-date has left inmates malnourished.

But worst of all is the use of vice girls to torment the most religiously devout detainees. Prisoners who have never seen an "unveiled" woman before are forced to watch as the hookers touch their own naked bodies. One said an American girl had smeared menstrual blood across his face in an act of humiliation!

You make me sick! How dare you call yourselves the land of the free and the defenders of civilization. You make me sick! You are a bunch of depraved lunatics who deserve to drown in pig shit!

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592922)

Good, those sandniggers deserve everything that comes their way.

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

repetty (260322) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592930)

"You are a bunch of depraved lunatics who deserve to drown in pig shit!"

The last line was the best!

99.9% of Americans have never seen pig shit. This insult is totally lost on Americans.

Edit and resubmit.

--Richard

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592937)

This comment is hiliarous. I wonder where he get's his information.

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592959)

Ashamed? I've never been more proud!

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593009)

>forced to watch as the hookers touch their own naked bodies

Sounds to me like the inmates are having a pretty good time!

I think it's a good thing the government has arranged for some entertainment during their visit at the facility.

Re:American WHORES torment religious muslims! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593091)

"But worst of all is the use of vice girls to torment the most religiously devout detainees. Prisoners who have never seen an "unveiled" woman before are forced to watch as the hookers touch their own naked bodies. One said an American girl had smeared menstrual blood across his face in an act of humiliation!"

Those BASTARDS. I had to PAY last time American girl smeared menstrual blood across my face! And these prisoners get it for free? Goddamned criminal coddlers.

For the ignorant (like me) (3, Interesting)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592898)

Could somone go over the diffrences between X11 and Xorg? Is it just a license issue, or are there other differences?

Thank you.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (2, Informative)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592957)

Xorg is an implementation of X11. XFree86 is another implementation of X11.

What you want is to know the difference between XFree86 and Xorg.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (5, Informative)

DA-MAN (17442) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592984)

Could somone go over the diffrences between X11 and Xorg? Is it just a license issue, or are there other differences?

X11 is the 11th iteration of the X protocol. XOrg, XFree86, and most commercial X servers speak X11R6 these days. Speaking the X protocol is key to interoperability from Unix to Unix.

X11 as a protocol doesn't have a license issue that i am aware of. Did you by any chance mean the differences between XFree86 and XOrg?

If that is what you meant, then the answer is simple, XOrg is a branch right before the XFree86 license change, so it's pretty safe to say that XOrg isn't too different at all at this point in time.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (5, Informative)

Crispy Critters (226798) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593070)

"Speaking the X protocol is key to interoperability from Unix to Unix."

How about "key to interoperability between X client and X server". Remember that X was implemented on VMS as well as on Unix, not to mention the version in X terminals and various emulators for MSWindows and Mac.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (1)

vesamies (240247) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593158)

Remember that X was implemented on VMS as well as on Unix


That's true, install X11 software and you can connect to millions of unix boxes around the world.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (5, Informative)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593026)

To expand more helpfully on the previous poster's comment...

XFree86 and XOrg are both implementations of X11. X11 is technically a protocol, not a particular program. This is why X11 has persisted for so long despite repeated attempts to dislodge it. Everybody who tries to do something better forgets that X11 is a protocol, and that's actually why it's so popular. They usually end up implementing something that's an API, which is just all wrong.

The XOrg implementation of X11 is a fork of the XFree86 codebase, just before XFree86 changed its license to be not quite free enough for most people to be comfortable using it.

Re:For the ignorant (like me) (2, Insightful)

Omnifarious (11933) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593069)

Also, there has been some internal strife with the XFree86 organization. From my external viewpoint, it seems like the people own largely control the organization are somewhat slow about changing things or adopting new ideas into XFree86.

XFree86, up to this point, has been a defining implementation of the X11 protocol. Most new things in the X11 protocol have come from the XFree86 project. But, I suspect that's no longer going to be the case.

De Facto (3, Interesting)

Metallic Matty (579124) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592899)

That's one of the reasons I like the open-source market. There is no de facto, its pragmatic.

At least, in theory.

Re:De Facto (5, Funny)

normal_guy (676813) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592928)

One of the reasons I _don't_ like the open source market. Make a comment about one of the developer's favorite movies, and a new fork is started.

Re:De Facto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593047)

Yeah, it would suck to live in a world were people were different. Thank the Almighty Bob it's not like that here on MS Earth 3.11!

Re:De Facto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593101)

Who's talking about people dumbass? He's talking about OSs.

Re:De Facto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593202)

People write OSes, and if people are different, the OSes they write will probably be too. Unless you're profoundly autistic, you should be fully capable of understanding that.

dumbass.

Re:De Facto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592992)

That's one of the reasons I like the open-source market. There is no de facto, its pragmatic.

Open Source is great. I have hundreds of different projects in various stages of disarray to choose from to accomplish my tasks. Compare this to the Windows world where you must buy software that is complete and documented!! Windows sucks!

Re:De Facto (2, Informative)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593051)

lol0x

ever have an MSDN subscription?

finished? you gotta be joking

documentation? that's whats source code is for

Re:De Facto (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593170)

documentation? that's whats source code is for

I hate it when people say this.

Given only the source code for GCC, Postgresql (or DB system of your choice), networking stack, and OpenGL, write an MMORPG.

Prepare for TOAST! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592900)

toaster,toaster toaser, do you have toast in you yet i think [rowdyruff.net]
so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Im not a toaster!!!!!!!!!!And one more
thing........YOUR A TOASER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND A COOKIE WITH MILK SOAGE
MILK!!!!!!!!!!AND A BUTT WITH POOP IN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great, but... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592901)

I think the more fundamental problem is, Linux is shit.

Great (0, Insightful)

HappyCitizen (742844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592907)

Just when Linux was getting to the point where it could overtake Windows, even in the desktop (www.mandrake.com) environment, XFree86 changes its license. Now, Fedora is switching its Graphical Display. No matter the security, the stability, etc. the average home user will probably remain with windows. He wants his program to be work with his computer. It may not be that simple once more distro's use more widely varied XFree86 implementations

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592970)

Um.. it wasn't even close yet.

I'm sorry, but if my friend freaks out whenever he hear's a mouse click when he's not on his Windows PC (think page reload or something), I don't think he or the general population that isn't a uber elite linux nerd is ready for it.

Re:Great (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592982)

You don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about, do you. It's not a new program, it's a fork of an old one. It's as stable as it always have been.

Re:Great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592993)

Huh. Yeah, it must be the X implementation holding it back. It couldn't be the broken out-of-the-box sound drivers (for a friggin Soundblaster Live!), the incredibly user-unfriendly rigmarole one has to go through to update the 3D drivers, the boot loader that won't respond to the keyboard, the Samba printer that's recognized and swears that it's working but never actually prints anything, the mouse that freezes for a half a second every 10 seconds or so, or ANY of that.

I'm just at a loss to explain why Mandrake 10.0 hasn't already taken over the world. Oh yeah, it's the X-11 licensing issues.

GMAMFB.

Re:Great (0)

HappyCitizen (742844) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593073)

Maybe try Mandrake 9.2, working out of the box sound rivers, detects all hardware and gives a nice 2d driver, boot loader works beautifully, 3d driver install wasn't that bad after reading NVIDIA instructions, detects printer, prints test page within seconds. It doesn't have anything that makes it more difficult than windows. Maybe, you should use an official release instead of community, and get some results...

Re:Great (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593049)

Just when Linux was getting to the point where it could overtake Windows.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Re:Great (4, Informative)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593055)

Who modded up this as "Insightful"? It's nothing more than clueless bashing.

X11 is a standard, not an implementation! Just like HTML is a standard!
That distro A uses XFree86 and distro B uses XOrg means absolutely nothing to end users. Everything's still interoperable because X11 is a standard. Everything will still Just Work(tm) and the end user won't even notice something has changed.

Re:Great (2, Insightful)

Jahf (21968) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593159)

You state that the end user won't even notice AFTER USING HTML as an example?

Let's go back a bit and look at the history of browsers implenting the HTML standards differently. Differing implementations can make a tremendous difference to end users and also (especially) to developers.

Re:Great (3, Insightful)

jared_hanson (514797) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593131)

That's why we have the X11 protocol -- so there can be multiple implementations that remain compatible. The end user will never be aware of the switch, assuming the previous and current X server correctly implements the protocol.

I wouldn't dare to imagine the number of times that MS has replaced or retrofitted (read: ugly hacks) technologies found in previous versions of Windows. Only in there case, its all closed so you aren't aware of it. In all liklihood, the MS situation is worse, since it leads to bloat and security risks.

Just because open source development airs its dirty laundry in the wind does not mean it yeilds worse software than closed source development. Quite the contrary, I think if you researched your position you would find better software.

anyone else... (-1, Offtopic)

0xCOFFEE (763099) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592908)

found the blurb to sound like a spy commentary?

First X Sucks Post! (-1, Troll)

Burgundy Advocate (313960) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592909)

"Every time I look at the X window system, it's so fucking stupid; and part of me feels responsible for the worst parts of it."

"The color model and the fonts is aggressively stupid. It works, but oh my god. It's awful."

--James Gosling, X Architect [theregister.co.uk]

Re:First X Sucks Post! (4, Informative)

Tet (2721) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592967)

James Gosling, X Architect

Of course, Gosling was never an X architect. Those were Scheifler, Gettys and Newman. Gosling was the architect of NeWS, a competing windowing system that ultimately lost out to X. Yes, IHBT. Thank you and good night.

Re:First X Sucks Post! (3, Informative)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592991)

That's what the XRender and Xft are for! They are full replacements for the old rendering model and font subsystem.

Re:First X Sucks Post! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593012)


"Every time I look at the X window system, it's so fucking stupid; and part of me feels responsible for the worst parts of it."

"The color model and the fonts is aggressively stupid. It works, but oh my god. It's awful."

--James Gosling, X Architect


If he feels so bad why did e make an even bigger mess with Java?

Re:First X Sucks Post! (0, Offtopic)

Otter (3800) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593016)

The Register may be stupid and generally wrong, but it is good for lines like "Gosling is a good-natured Canadian, and he set about the competition with the same relish that his countrymen have for clubbing baby seals."

Proper Context (4, Informative)

rjstanford (69735) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593044)

The quote, as seen in the actual article:
"They were going as far away from my design as they possibly could," he said.


How so?

"The color model and the fonts is aggressively stupid. It works, but oh my god. It's awful."
Here its obvious that Gosling not only didn't create the color model and font system that's part of X, but in fact was proposing quite different solutions as part of his NeWS competitive system. The parent quote makes it sound as if he's admitting that he created them in X, and now hates them.

C'mon now...

Besides, if you never read the articles, and just look at the exceprts, you'd never know about the asparagus. What asparagus, I hear you ask? My point exactly.

well (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592910)

Well there goes the neighborhood.

I'm confused (3, Insightful)

Mr. Darl McBride (704524) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592916)

Someone clear me in:

Is this the same thing as Xouvert, or something new?

Can someone give a ten second summary of the differences in the goals and developers of XFree86, Xouvert and Xorg?

Re:I'm confused (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593072)

Sure, the thing with XFree86

Re:I'm confused (1)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593172)

Xouvert is yet another implementation of X11, based on XFree86, developed (roughly) in parallel to XFree86 with some different methodoogy, and with the intention of feeding stuff back to XFree86.

I don't know how (or if) the recent XFree86 licence change affects it.

Re:I'm confused (4, Informative)

Fourier (60719) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593196)

Xouvert differs from the others in that it appears to be a dead project [gnu.org] .

De Facto Standards (5, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592924)

It's just become another standard - not the de facto one. De facto implies that it is, in fact, the standard, as opposed to, say, de jure, which is a legal standard (cf. "laws more honoured in the breach").

Fedora switching just means we have more choice. This is a good thing, just like KDE vs. Gnome is a good thing.

Most people will settle for whatever comes with their distro, so maybe this will give an impetus for the X group to clean up the licensing issue :-)

Re:De Facto Standards (5, Funny)

Fourier (60719) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593153)

De facto implies that it is, in fact, the standard, as opposed to, say, de jure

In the case of open source software, sometimes I think it is more accurate to speak of "the standard du jour."

Anything is wellcome ! (0, Offtopic)

cda (750377) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592925)

People ! I am bulding You are building They are building So ... let's give them the credit for offering alternatives.

Isn't X.org a fork of Xfee86.. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592931)

I recall reading that X.org had taken an early version of Xfree86 code and forked from there.. is this correct? Which version?

Path of least resistance (5, Informative)

nonmaskable (452595) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592933)

I think the XOrg codebase is pretty much the last pre-license-change (4.4rc2) release, plus work done by the folks recently run out of XFree86 by Dawes.

Variety is good (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592934)

While I don't think the X world will turn on its ear just because Fedora may start using Xorg, I think the fact that one or more distributions are currently/going-to try it out is A Good Thing(tm).

Will THIS be the wakeup call to XFree86? (1, Interesting)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592942)

I'm not holding my breath, but perhaps ...

No, I doubt it too. What WILL it take to wake them up?

Re:Will THIS be the wakeup call to XFree86? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593190)

they are a lost cause, and i am glad someone has moved on from them

its a waste to deal with them anymore. screw em, they gave a lot of good, but they also dragged their feet in the recent past.

i thank them for what they gave. but its time some of the distros embrace newer projects and really bring X up a couple notches. not that its bad, but theres always room for improvement and there is a lot of things that should be done (like the compositing manager etc);

Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (2, Insightful)

meldroc (21783) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592949)

Both NVidia and ATI keep their driver sources and hardware-level programming information closely guarded secrets. This means unless NVidia and ATI decide to support the new X server, we're gonna be stuck with lousy 2-d drivers, maybe with accelerated blitting if the mfgrs decide to throw us a few crumbs.

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (2, Informative)

tannhaus (152710) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593067)

I can't speak for ATI, but I know that nvidia includes the source for their drivers. You can actually compile it on your machine. So, I don't see this as really a problem with nvidia...especially since X.org code is just a fork of XFree86 code. Just recompile and use.

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593122)

uhh... they do not include the source for their drivers

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (4, Informative)

Nerull (586485) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593145)

Thats the source for the kernel interface, not the X driver itself..thats a binary.

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (2, Informative)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593181)

Look again.. they provide an OS wrapper in source form, and there is some odd binary file in there that has the actual driver.

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (3, Informative)

EnormousTooth (678644) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593148)

Umm... as far as i know, you CAN use the existing drivers with it. It's a fork of XFree86.

Re:Drivers could be a problem for a long time. (3, Informative)

Senjutsu (614542) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593155)

Xorg is a barely couple-month old fork of XFree86 that took place right before XFree switched to their new lisence. Driver compatibility isn't going to be an issue.

This is great news. (2, Interesting)

Rick and Roll (672077) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592952)

I am glad to see them choose X.org over freedesktop.org. I do not want to see X be replaced with an LGPL fork.

X is not just a Linux thing. A major free version of X should be designed to work on BSD as well. BSD users do not want to have to put their codebase closer to the GPL than it already is.

Plus, I like the idea of standardizing on MAS. In some ways inferior to Jack, but anything that gets a lower-latency sound daemon to be a standard i'm for.

Re:This is great news. (3, Informative)

AKnightCowboy (608632) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593018)

I am glad to see them choose X.org over freedesktop.org. I do not want to see X be replaced with an LGPL fork.

Hmm, the link is to xorg.freedesktop.org. Are you sure you got what you wanted? It looks like they ARE using the fork.

Re:This is great news. (5, Informative)

Rick and Roll (672077) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593213)

Actually, both projects are on Freedesktop.org. One's called Xorg, the other Xserver. And Xorg appears to be under the standard X license.

Kind of strange, but not really. Just one project (freedesktop.org) providing excellent free CVS hosting for free desktop projects, and two very similar projects with very different leadership joining.

Re:This is great news. (1)

r5t8i6y3 (574628) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593223)

please mod parent up

Re:This is great news. (5, Informative)

be-fan (61476) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593236)

Let's stamp out this rumor before it spreads further. The new FD.O X server is under the standard MIT X license, not the LGPL!

you might want to check this out (1)

cyberneticwalrus (763142) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592971)

http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/XserverFAQ

Re:you might want to check this out (5, Informative)

Lussarn (105276) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593046)

There are two Xservers at freedesktop.org, the one this FAQ goes to is not the one implemented in Fedora core. The one in Fedora core is a fork of XFree. The one this FAQ is for is a newer and interesting one albeit not ready for prime time yet.

Of course! (2)

mahdi13 (660205) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592974)

Anyone else think that these personal comments at the end of news posts are irrelevant and should be marked -1 Redundant?

Of course this marks the start of a new trend, Red Hat just beat Mandrake to it. After the announcement last month about XFree86's license change and the very negative response for everyone, this was expected. It's only surprising because it happened so quick

Get some PRIORITIES, people (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8592980)

It's mere hours after the single WORST TERRORIST ATTACK IN RECORDED HISTORY [boston.com] and you people are talking about windowing systems???? MY GOD, people, GET SOME PRIORITIES!!!!!!

Re:Get some PRIORITIES, people (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593090)

27 dead is hardly the worst terrorist attack in recorded history. Why just last week 200 were killed in spain... I know, IHBT, but theres no need to trivialise death, whether its 2 or 27 or 200 or 200,000,000 dead with stupidity like the parent.

De-facto? (3, Insightful)

Nimrangul (599578) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592986)

Why is it everyone insists there must be a de-facto standard for everything?

It's X, X is for the most part X whichever X you run. If feature y on server z of X doesn't make it the standard, what make anyone think license clause w for server v will?

Having two equally used Xes would be better I'd think, after all they follow the same X standard.

Great... (0)

thepeete (189121) | more than 10 years ago | (#8592988)

just as Red Hat got Gnome and KDE to look exactly the same... Merge the wrappers, split the libraries

If it's compatible, they will use it ... (5, Insightful)

molarmass192 (608071) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593003)

XOrg could end up becoming the new de-facto X11 implementation

It's a little early to make that kind of prediction. However, the key is compatibility. If XORG maintains full compatibility such that it's still X11 and we can just a recompile and go on our merry way, then anything is possible. Personally, I don't think people care which code base their X server uses so long as it's an X11 server. Reality is that the XF86 group will wake up an smell the coffee sooner rather than later, they're expendable, they just don't know it yet.

Re:If it's compatible, they will use it ... (5, Informative)

vidarh (309115) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593034)

Considering that it's the X.Org foundation that is maintaining the X11 standard, the compatibility is a given - their X11 implementation IS the reference implementation of X11.

Re:If it's compatible, they will use it ... (0)

molarmass192 (608071) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593173)

Touche!!!

Re:If it's compatible, they will use it ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593082)

If it stays X11, you wouldn't even need to recompile. X11 specifies a protocol, not a programmatic interface! Thins as bizarre as Lisp Machines that can spit out X11 packets can display just fine on my current X server.

X11 is Bill Gates's best friend (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593017)

Now's the time to dump X11 once and for all...

Re:X11 is Bill Gates's best friend (2, Insightful)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593246)

I guess that is why MS and others are still replicating one of X' most important features, being usable over a network to provide a remote desktop. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely time to kick out some outdated stuff or at least bring in replacement for many of the things X does when used locally, but generally X is very usefull and there is no reason to throw that away.

alternatives to X (0, Troll)

moojin (124799) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593128)

why not keep XFree (old version) for a while and work on an X alternative, something like the front end for Mac OS X...

Stick a Done in me, I'm Forked (2, Funny)

n8willis (54297) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593162)

OK ... for the benefit of those of us who don't hack X in our spare time: is the Xorg implementation the same as the "freedesktop.org" implementation (at http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/xserver) or are they separate and distinct? (Or maybe just separate?)

Either way, how about brainstorming-up a better project name? I personally like "Product X" but that may already be taken.

N

Questions from an illiterate X user (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593169)

Are X.org and Freedesktop.org the same or are they different distributions?

-clueless

Like we didn't see this coming (1)

mst76 (629405) | more than 10 years ago | (#8593176)

Doesn't really take a genius to predict [slashdot.org] that this would happen :-)

tdubgiRl (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593177)

clothes or be a infinite51mally

OK listen up (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593182)

Alright, there's been a shitload of ignorant posts here.

First off, this new server is a snapshot of XFree86 just prior to the licence change. Basically a fork.

Second, it basically has nothing to do with X.org - I don't know why they call it that, most likely due to the licence.

Third, X11 is the protocol that X servers speak nowadays. X version 11 release 6.6 to be more precise.

Fourth, nvidia and ati drivers will work.

I hope this clears it up somewhat.

The Lowdown (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593218)

Ok kids, here's the quick summary to get everyone up to speed.

XFree86 [xfree86.org] and FreeDesktop.org's X server [freedesktop.org] are both X11R6-compatible X servers. The FreeDesktop.org server (herein known as XOrg) is a fork of an old XFree86 project called the KDrive.

The KDrive was a tiny X server implementation originally designed for PDAs and such. When you compile it the binary comes out to about 700kB and it requires hardly anything else to function. The author of the KDrive took (read: forked) it from XFree86's tree and started adding onto it, and it became XOrg.

So X11R6 applications and libraries work almost exactly the same under XOrg. The XFree86-specific extensions to drivers and shit need to be ported but most apps don't use those.

Gentoo, RedHat, I think SuSE and Debian and soon to be more Linux distros are all slowly switching to XOrg. Until then they'll be shipping XFree86 4.3.99.902 and below as those are the ones without the evil licensing changes.

This has been in the works for some time people, so it's not a rumor or a guess.

Note: XOrg isn't the real name of the server, I just call it that cuz im lazy. XOrg is the name of a foundation that puts out this FD.O Xserver. Info here [freedesktop.org] .

Stuff that matters, indeed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8593242)

This is an important milestone in the growth of Linux as a whole. Using xFree86 felt like wearing very heavy shackles due to its recent adoption of a horrendous draconian licensing scheme.

xOrg on the other hand avoids these issues by literally borrowing the xFree86 code, preserving it the way it was before the licensing scheme changed for the worse.

We should all take note of this process. I for one, think that the latest version of Mozilla is too bloated. That's why I've taken the source from (current_version - 1), de-bloated it, and altered the license so that I can make a lot of money from it. I've even changed the name to Zila (pronounced like the "zilla" in "Mozilla") to match that of our company [zila.com] .

Once xOrg gets mature enough to mess up their licensing scheme, I'll drop right in and make a tidy profit again.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?