re: What to do with base X11 for netbsd-9 ?

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

Martin Husemann writes:
> Hey folks,
> 
> I would like to get your feedback about the current state of the base X11,
> as there have been lots of threads about various issues and I have lost
> the overview of what works in -current and what does not.
> 
> We *really* need to branch netbsd-9 very soon now, and it is unclear (at
> least to me) what should happen to the in-tree X11 version.
> 
>  - we have very obvious display bugs at first sight in xdm

let's revert to the old xdm for now.  this one should be easy.
can someone work on it please?

>  - self hosting builds on 4 GB amd64 machines are not really possible
>    any more (due to LLVM runtime dependencies, which can not even be
>    disabled at build time right now)

we should fix it to be disable-able.  i don't think the default
should change.  [*]

>  - reports here (and on other lists) about display problems and success
>    stories have no clear winner (but probably due to me losing track)

i've not heard back about anyone using the now-re-addded old
intel driver yet, but AFAICT, everyone either had success with
dropping the old driver binary in place or using 'modesetting'.

i was hoping to find time to bisect the intel driver tree from
the 2014-snapshot to the top of tree to find where the display
issues appeared, but perhaps we should switch back to the old
driver for now until i or someone has fixed the new one..


.mrg.


[*] i wonder if a hack to make to force a lower parallism for
some subdirs would help these systems.  eg:

.MAKE.PARALLEL= ${MAKE_LLVM_JOBS:U${MAKE_JOBS}}

and the (new) .MAKE.PARALLEL would set the -jN value for this
sub-make, allowing other sub-makes to be run concurrently,
but only N in llvm.