[aur-general] Delete requests for obsolete XWayland packages

[Tim Jester-Pfadt]

Hi,

I think there might be a confusion regarding package [6].

For our regular desktops we need the XOrg server which comes as a binary in
/usr/bin/Xorg provided by the xorg-server package in [extra]. You get this
by setting --enable-xorg at compile time. Now for XWayland we have our own
binary which is completely independet called /usr/bin/Xwayland. You get
this binary by setting --enable-xwayland. You can have this as a standalone
server by doing --disable-xorg --enable-xwayland, which then only builds
XWayland. This is what the xwayland-git package does and therefore doesn't
replace your X server and is a safe way to try out XWayland. You don't have
two X servers afterwards.

Package [6] does both it compiles the developer Xorg binary and the
development Xwayland binary, but if you want to try Xwayland you only need
the last one. If you want the latest Xorg (which actually gets used by KDE
et al.) you can use xorg-server-git, which only builds Xorg but not
Xwayland.  So there is no real need for a package that builds both.

Regards,

Tim


2014-05-28 20:31 GMT+02:00 Lukas Jirkovsky <l.jirkovsky at gmail.com>:

> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Tim Jester-Pfadt <t.jp at gmx.de> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > now that XWayland changed to being it's own server binary, rather than a
> > module for X11, there are several obsolete drivers on the AUR which only
> > create confusion.[1][2][3] The new XWayland doesn't need patched drivers
> > anymore.
> >
> > "In the old model, things like modesetting were done in the video driver,
> > unfortunately. In the old model, we simply patched Xorg with a special
> > magical mode to tell video drivers not to do anything too tricky. For
> > instance, the xf86-video-intel driver had a special branch for Xwayland
> > support<
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-intel/log/?h=xwayland>.
> > For generic hardware support, we wrote a generic, unaccelerated
> > driver<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-wayland>
> > that
> > stubbed out most of the functions we needed. With the new approach, we
> > don’t need to patch anything at all." [4]
> >
> > There is also an orphaned build of the development X server, which tries
> to
> > build the old deprecated XWayland approach. [5] You can see this, because
> > it has --enable-wayland instead of the new --enable-xwayland.
> > Another build is a duplicated of the defacto standard xwayland package
> > (xwayland-git) the difference is that it not only builds XWayland, but
> also
> > the whole X11 server from the development branch even though this is not
> > needed.[6] People could just use the xorg-server-dev and install
> > xwayland-git and get the same thing.
> >
> >
> > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xf86-video-ati-xwayland-git/ -
> > Orphaned
> > [2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xf86-video-intel-xwayland-git/ -
> > Maintained by plfiorini<
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?K=plfiorini&SeB=m>
> > [3] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xf86-video-wlglamor-git/ -
> Orphaned
> > [4] http://blog.mecheye.net/2014/04/xwayland/
> > [5] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xorg-server-xwayland/ - Orphaned
> > [6] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/xorg-server-xwayland-dev / -
> > Maintained by maxi_jac<
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?K=maxi_jac&SeB=m>
>
> I wanted to go through the xwayland packages eventually, but since you
> listed them so nicely... Thank you for that.
>
> I've removed [1], [2], [3], [5]
>
> I think it makes sense to keep [6], until the xorg-server-git gets
> xwayland support, because not everyone wants to have two x servers
> installed.
>