Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

X.Org Server 1.8.0 Is Here

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    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.

    Comment


    • #12
      As I understand it, HAL support is being dropped because HAL itself has been deprecated in favor of DeviceKit+udev.

      Comment


      • #13
        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

        Comment


        • #14
          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.

          Comment


          • #15
            now do we want spam? NO!

            Comment


            • #16
              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

              Comment


              • #17
                But operating systems like the *BSDs don't have udev. What are they doing to use when HAL dies?

                Comment


                • #18
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    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

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      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

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X