Re: x.org dropped imake, now what is the best way to convert existing Imakefile so it can be used with automake et all?

On a sunny day (Fri, 30 Dec 2005 20:58:57 +0000) it happened Roger Leigh
<${rleigh}@invalid.whinlatter.ukfsn.org.invalid> wrote in
<87lky29u9a.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>> X.org has dropped Imake, does that automatically mean XFree will
>> drop it too?
>
>No, but XFree is itself already effectively obsoleted by its own
>actions.
I do not see that, i am very happy with it.

>> If so, I have a lot to do.
>> This system runs xfree, somehow like that better.
>
>Do you like the new licensing terms? The rest of the free software
>world has already switched.
You show some strange bias, have you actually READ this link:
http://www.xfree.org/legal/licenses.html

And note this, I quote from that link:
<quote>
What about GPL-compatibility? Is XFree86 GPL compatible?

The XFree86 Project maintains that the 4.4.0 release of XFree86 is as GPL
compatible as any and all previous versions were.
</quote>


I must say that I have been to X.org several times too, and it sort
of makes me turn away irritated and suspicious.
I know some distributions now use X.org, and I suspect deals have been made
by the industry.
We will have to see how we fare with DRM making it into the graphics cards
and all that, maybe X.org will have access to info XFree developers will
have a hard time to get..

This is actually a bad thing, all these alliances to screw up a good hardware
platform with that DRM crap.
Anyways make your own FPGA board with Linux and show them what a bunch of
losers they are (those DRM alliances).

So, I see XFree as the lighter side, and X.org on the darker side.
And I see automake accordingly.

Nevertheless I am trying a port of a much more complicated X program now,
this all takes many hours ..... but once I get some templates / scripts
for myself maybe it will be easier.
.

Quantcast