Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: X.Org Server 1.8.0 Is Here

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by unimatrix View Post
    Why exactly is udev so much better than HAL?
    I believe udev is a part of the kernel, which can make relying on it more desirable than relying on HAL.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    As I understand it, HAL support is being dropped because HAL itself has been deprecated in favor of DeviceKit+udev.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    As I understand it, HAL support is being dropped because HAL itself has been deprecated in favor of DeviceKit+udev.
    According to Wikipedia, DeviceKit is deprecated too. It's been merged into udev.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_%28...%29#Deprecated
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeviceKit#DeviceKit_Future

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pvtcupcakes View Post
    According to Wikipedia, DeviceKit is deprecated too. It's been merged into udev.
    I thought that was more of a rename than a deprecation.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    974

    Default

    now do we want spam? NO!

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    974

    Default

    On topic, hal's a bit of an abomination...why not just use one level abstraction, such as the kernel's to expose the devices to applications such as X?

    About time X does away with Hal...and sticks with udev

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    233

    Default

    But operating systems like the *BSDs don't have udev. What are they doing to use when HAL dies?

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KDesk View Post
    But operating systems like the *BSDs don't have udev. What are they doing to use when HAL dies?
    They don't need udev and have their own equivalents. The developers porting Xorg to other operating systems will make those changes among others. HAL used to abstract away all that but turned out to be not the right approach.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut,USA
    Posts
    974

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RahulSundaram View Post
    They don't need udev and have their own equivalents. The developers porting Xorg to other operating systems will make those changes among others. HAL used to abstract away all that but turned out to be not the right approach.
    exactly..good point

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Just tried xserver 1.8, had to disable hal and enable dbus manually (cause hal was starting it by itself), ran Xorg -configure, reboot - works. Well sort of

    Compiz was trippy (key lags, graphic artifacts all over my screen), switching to metacity solved that. Extremetuxracer froze X nicely So my guess it's mesa 7.8 that is causing the troubles...

    X -version
    X.Org X Server 1.8.0
    Release Date: 2010-04-02

    glxinfo | grep Mesa
    client glx vendor string: Mesa Project and SGI
    OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 965GM GEM 20100328 2010Q1
    OpenGL version string: 2.1 Mesa 7.8

    xf86-video-intel 2.11

    Arch Linux, Gnome 2.30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •