[Fedora-packaging] [review: xorg-x11-server-Xgl] How you prefer start Xgl?

alcapcom alcapcom at gmail.com
Wed Mar 21 15:09:34 UTC 2007

Hi list,

Few months ago I have add a review for Xgl, without success at this
time. Considering that fglrx driver still not support AIGLX, this
package is useful for most of the fedora Desktop users.

The specfile follow the packaging guide line, and seem to be clean. The
only blocker that stay is "howto start Xgl".

The goal of this mail, is to know which of the two solutions you
preferred and why. 
Have try to sum the (+/-) of each solution, if there is other
coolstuff/limitation/problem of one of them, it should be useful to know

In advance, Thanks.

Start Xgl from GDM (session menu)
(+) The login time is shorter (last Xorg improvement)
(+) Can choice a X type before login
(-) Traditionally X is started on the display :0, but that is not
possible if we
start Xgl from GDM (dislay :0 should already used by GDM) 
(-) There are 3 log files for X (Xorg.0.log, Xorg.1.log and Xorg.93.log) that
should appear strange for the end user. 
(-) For each WM available available on fedora, we needs a .desktop file (GDM session menu
 can quickly look too long)
(-) two X are loaded at boot time + 1 if rgbd is used (graphical boot).

Try it : http://files.damaestro.us/xgl/Xgl-settings-0.1-3.fc6.noarch.rpm 

Start GDM with Xgl
(+) do not have any of (-) thing of the first solution.
(-) The only thing that I see is that the login take more time between
the username input and the password input.

Try it:


REVIEW BZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192436

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070321/92c8f429/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list