ports/137373: x11/libX11: make dependance on x11/libxcb
Carlos A. M. dos Santos
unixmania at gmail.com
Mon Dec 21 00:56:11 UTC 2009
On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Robert Noland <rnoland at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 10:11 +0300, Max Brazhnikov wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:06:37 -0200, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
>> > On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Robert Noland <rnoland at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 00:30 -0200, Carlos A. M. dos Santos wrote:
>> > ....
>> > >> Is it acceptable a patch allowing to diable XCB without a menu? The
>> > >> default behavior is kept but users can put "WITHOUT_XCB=true" in
>> > >> /etc/make.conf, ensuring that all ports are built the same way.
>> > >
>> > > If it is defined as a KNOB and all of the ports override the option if
>> > > the KNOB is set, then yes I'm ok with it. I just don't want an option,
>> > > since it makes foot shooting easier.
>> > >
>> > > robert.
>> > Ok, I will submit a followup with an new patch.
>> As KDE (and several multimedia ports) maintainer I object to having xcb knob
>> in x11 ports. Turning it off will break plist and/or build of these ports,
>> they does require libx11 compiled with xcb support.
> Well, I don't get why anyone would not want it. I have had discussions
> with other Xorg folk about making it mandatory for X.
Remember that not everybody wants X for running GNOME or KDE. Think
about appliances and kiosks where small footprint counts more than
fancy functionality or even performance. That's what I'm attempting to
do here. I could maintain a private set of customized ports - and have
been doing this, to some extent - but it is much better to put the
options in the regular ports. Also, I'm not the only one interested on
such thing. Look at x11/xorg-minimal, for instance.
More information about the freebsd-x11