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

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <26566.1559152951%splode.eterna.com.au@localhost>,
matthew green  <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost> wrote:
>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?

Are those display bugs though? Or is it just that the right default
properties are not there? If it is just a properties issue, we can
fix it differently.

>>  - 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.  [*]

Yes, we should fix it to be disable-able and the default should
stay to build it.

>
>>  - 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..

My experience with the new driver has been better than that with
the old driver (fewer to none visual artifact issues).

christos