ATTENTION: XFree86-devel and xorg-x11-devel will no longer exist very soon.

[Mike A. Harris]

This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package
maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no
longer exist in Fedora Core 5.

The current rawhide monolithic xorg-x11 build has had the virtual
"Provides: XFree86-devel" removed to both find out what all packages
were still using it, and also as a heads up to developers and
package maintainers to update their packages, as this is no longer
a valid BuildRequires.

All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or
"BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this
dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for
each library that is needed.

For example:

BuildRequires: libX11-devel
BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel

etc..

When updating packages for rawhide, be sure to not use xorg-x11-devel
either, because it only exists temporarily for a week or less.  Once
modular X goes into rawhide, packages depending on either of these
dependencies will need to be updated in order to build properly, so
it is best to make the change now if possible.

I'd like to thank everyone who has helped update packages so far,
as this helps to minimize the amount of work needed later.

Thanks in advance!


P.S.  This email has been sent to fedora-devel-list, however please
       feel free to forward this to other developmental mailing lists
       which I might not be subscribed to if you think the information
       is useful to a wider audience who might not read
       fedora-devel-list.

[Charles Lopes]

Would it be a bad idea to have an update for FC3 and FC4 of their 
current xorg-x11-devel with additional provides (libX11-devel,
libXinerama-devel)? This would make it easier to recompile FC5 SRPMs on 
these older systems.

[Mike A. Harris]

Charles Lopes wrote:
>  Would it be a bad idea to have an update for FC3 and FC4 of their 
>  current xorg-x11-devel with additional provides (libX11-devel,
>  libXinerama-devel)? This would make it easier to recompile FC5 SRPMs on 
>  these older systems. 
I plan on doing that in the next FC3/FC4 updates, but that will wait
until there is a good enough reason to do another FC3/FC4 update.  There
are a few bug fixes and driver updates that could potentially be a part
of that too.  Current priorities are aligned with getting modular X into
rawhide however, so an FC3/FC4 update isn't on the radar currently,
but it will happen at some point.

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 08:30:04PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
>  This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package
>  maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no
>  longer exist in Fedora Core 5. 
>  All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or
>  "BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this
>  dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for
>  each library that is needed.
>  
>  For example:
>  
>  BuildRequires: libX11-devel
>  BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel
>  
>  etc.. 
Is there a list for the new *-devel packages? It would make it easier
to packagers to identify the missing BuildRequires, perhaps even by
trial-and-error :)

Will the modular xorg-x11 packages be built from one spec file (the
retrieving the *-devel is trivial) or several?
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

[Rex Dieter]

Axel Thimm wrote:

>  Will the modular xorg-x11 packages be built from one spec file (the
>  retrieving the *-devel is trivial) or several? 
Several/lots.

-- Rex

[Mike A. Harris]

Axel Thimm wrote:
>  On Wed, Nov 09, 2005 at 08:30:04PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
>  
> >This is another friendly reminder to all developers and package
> >maintainers that "XFree86-devel" and "xorg-x11-devel" will no
> >longer exist in Fedora Core 5.
>  
>  
> >All packages which "BuildRequires: XFree86-devel" or
> >"BuildRequires: xorg-x11-devel" must be updated to remove this
> >dependency and replace it with individual BuildRequires for
> >each library that is needed.
> >
> >For example:
> >
> >BuildRequires: libX11-devel
> >BuildRequires: libXinerama-devel
> >
> >etc..
>  
>  
>  Is there a list for the new *-devel packages? It would make it easier
>  to packagers to identify the missing BuildRequires, perhaps even by
>  trial-and-error :) 
Yep, please visit the FC5 X.Org modularization page at:

     http://mharris.ca/xorg-modular/xorg-modularization.html

It has hyperlinks to the ftp directory in which you can download
the src and binary rpms that have been built so far, as well as
links to 4 text files which document the order in which everything
needs to be built.  The xorg-all-libs.txt file contains a list of
all of the modular X library package names, of which each has a
-devel subpackage.

In general, if an application links to libXfoo, then you just need
to put "BuildRequires: libXfoo-devel" for each X library it uses.

The one exception, is the screensaver library.  It is the only
package out of 40 libraries, in which the name of the package and
the name of the library are not the same.  The library is libXss,
and the package name is libXScrnSaver.  Yes this is silly, but it
is how upstream X.Org decided to name things.



>  Will the modular xorg-x11 packages be built from one spec file (the
>  retrieving the *-devel is trivial) or several? 
If it was all in one spec file, then it wouldn't be "modular".