1 |
William Kenworthy wrote: |
2 |
> I'm using the workaround of manually deleting the problem patch during |
3 |
> the build. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> The problem for gentoo that I see is that with the removal of -r1 (and |
6 |
> xfree being the only viable alternative is not available either), gentoo |
7 |
> does not have a usable desktop for those actually using it in |
8 |
> production, so this should be viewed as a serious issue that requires |
9 |
> active resolution - just leaving this issue in place until we catch up |
10 |
> with upstream means this is going to become a running sore for gentoo. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> We (the users) need a stable, secure, and working X. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> BillK |
15 |
The whole point of Gentoo is that you have the Ultimate say on what |
16 |
goes. If you don't like the current version of X you can write your own |
17 |
ebuild and do it however you like. No one forces you to use the ebuilds |
18 |
put out by the developers. If you want the -r1 version feel free to go |
19 |
into ViewCVS and get it; it should still be there. |
20 |
|
21 |
If you want your solution to be merged, you are better off trying to |
22 |
convince xorg's maintainer and you are better off having the work laid |
23 |
out to be done so that it's not a PITA for them to integrate it into |
24 |
Gentoo's tree. This mailing list is not the place for discussion of how |
25 |
the bug should be patched in the source, or whining because the ebuild |
26 |
the developer provided doesn't suit your particular needs. Make an |
27 |
overlay, modify the ebuild, and hazzah your needs are met. Gentoo has |
28 |
never promised a stable solution and unless the relevant GLEP is taken |
29 |
up by someone and implemented probably never will. |
30 |
-- |
31 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |