Default configuration for xorg-drivers (WTF?)

[Robert Noland]

On Tue, 2009-12-29 at 01:25 -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> I confess.  I haven't been keeing my ports at all up-to-date.  (And this has
> already caused me grief in at least one instance.)  Today I have been trying
> to rectify that, but I ran into a bit of a problem when I did:
> 
>   portupgrade -rR xorg-drivers
> 
> A couple of hours later I'm staring at these errors:
> 
> --->  Skipping 'x11-drivers/xorg-drivers' (xorg-drivers-7.3_3) because a requisite package 'xf86-video-cyrix-1.1.0_2' (x11-drivers/xf86-video-cyrix) failed (specify -k to force)
> ** Listing the failed packages (-:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed)
>         - x11-drivers/xf86-video-nsc (marked as IGNORE)
>         - x11-drivers/xf86-video-imstt (marked as IGNORE)
>         - x11-drivers/xf86-video-cyrix (marked as IGNORE)
>         - x11-drivers/xf86-video-via (marked as IGNORE)
>         * x11-drivers/xorg-drivers (xorg-drivers-7.3_3)
> 
> So OK.  I get it.  The xorg-drivers port wants all of these other chipset-
> specific drivers, some of which ain't in a buildable state right at the
> moment.  Fine OK.  I understand.  But ummm.... if those drivers ain't
> buildable right now, does it really make a lot of sense to leave them 
> *selected* as part of the *default* configuration for xorg-drivers ??
> 
> Call me dense, but hope somebody can explain to me how this makes sense.

run "make rmconfig && make config" in the xorg-drivers port.  Your
config is likely stale.  Most of these drivers are dead and gone.  I
plan to just delete them sometime soon, since not one person has claimed
to actually own the hardware and the IGNORE on those ports says to
contact me if you actually do.

robert.

> So anyway, after googling around for good twenty minutes (cuz when it comes
> to either ports or X11, I don't know my own ass from my elbow) I learned
> that I had to manually cd into /usr/ports/x11-drivers/xorg-drivers and then
> "make config" and select the driver(s) I actualy needed, and *de-select*
> all of the (broken) ones listed above as "IGNORE".  Fine.  No problem.
> Even _I_ can do that.  But ummm... wait just a second... oh s**t!  My
> motherboad uses the VIA M8M890 northbridge, so I _do_ need that bleedin'
> VIA driver.
> 
> So I google around another ten minutes or so and (luckily) I then come
> across this:
> 
>   http://groups.google.com/group/lucky.freebsd.ports/msg/b40b3298710a3086
> 
> OK. So I get it.  Use "openchrome" instead of "via".  No sweat.
> 
> But ummm...... Why is it that in the current up-to-date files relating to
> the xorg-drivers port, the openchrome driver is, by default, *de-selected*?
> 
> Should I be worried?
> 
> Is there something broken about the current openchrome driver?
> 
> Don't an awful lot of people (like me) need SOME sort of a driver for
> VIA-based graphics?  If so, then why the bleep doesn't the default
> config for xorg-drivers provide any such?
> 
> Since I was already trusting enough (stupid enough?) to proceed with my
> port upgrade to xorg-drivers-7.4_2 (WITH openchrome & WITHOUT the old
> VIA driver), upon my next reboot, and I going to be staring at a blank
> screen?
> 
> I sure hope not.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-x11 at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-x11
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
-- 
Robert Noland <rnoland at FreeBSD.org>
FreeBSD