Disable xterm and XRX builds per default / [Fwd: CVS Update: xc (branch: trunk)]

[Daniel Stone]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:25:03AM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> Around 4 o'clock on Jan 25, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Point taken, but I think the relative usages of DRI vs XRX would be interesting
> > as a case in point. ;)
> 
> Relative use is irrelevant.  X.org is the canonical upstream source for 
> xrx, and so downloading the X.org bits should build it by default.
> 
> When DRI can be built directly from the Mesa tree, we should disable 
> building that in the X.org tree by default.

I respectfully disagree.  I believe that we should *allow* building of that for
which we are the upstream source, and do our best (within reasonable limits) to
ensure that we don't gratuitiously break it, but I think the default install
should err on the side of sanity.  I don't think installing xrx by default is
sane, and it's all well and good to have it there and keep it working, but I
don't see any merit whatsoever in building and installing it per default.

AIUI, building DRI from Mesa can basically be done today.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20050125/b7b60df1/attachment.pgp>