X.org, distributors, and proprietary modules
Posted Aug 14, 2006 19:50 UTC (Mon) by warmcat1
Parent article: X.org, distributors, and proprietary modules
Much as I agree with the conclusion of the article, in fact there is the consideration that upgrading xorg may well bust some existing and working FC5 installs that are going to nightly yum the update. Of course the update would likely enable many more users to run better, for example this Samsung Q35 laptop only has working non-vesa video because it is running development repo xorg packages.
What is the meaning of FCn? It really has to mean that the set of packages that make it up are largely fixed in stone, it would suit many users that it meant that you will only get security updates. I have friends and family on Fedora boxes that I manage for them remotely and if they sucked down a new xorg it runs the risk of causing me more trouble than it would bring them benefit.
If FCn is "stable" and development is "CVS", might be interesting to offer instead "CVS snapshot" sets of development packages that work well for adventurous FCn users, libc versions and so on allowing. This big debate could then have been lessened by being able to point FC5 folks to the new xorg if they wanted it, even by something like fedoa-adventurous.repo if they want to buy into newer stuff with less risk than mainlining development.
to post comments)