Cygwin/XFree86 Leaving XFree86.org

An anonymous reader writes "The Cygwin/XFree86 project is leaving XFree86.org. For those that don't know, Cygwin/XFree86 is a port of the X Window System to Cygwin (which provides a *nix-like API on Windows). Here is the announcement and the start of the trouble. The XFree86 project has pushed away more developers than most projects ever have - is this the beginning of the end for XFree86?"

So uhhhh....

[DCowern]

What this means for XFree86

Some will say nothing. Some will say good riddance. Some will say this is the beginning of the end. Who knows? Who cares? Let /. figure it out.

So uhhhhh... who wants to tackle this one? ;-)

Best quote:

[Bombcar]

What this means for XFree86

Some will say nothing. Some will say good riddance. Some will say this is the beginning of the end. Who knows? Who cares? Let /. figure it out.

Re:Xouvert?

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's just say they make *BSD look alive.

Great...

[TheShadow]

This will trigger 100 posts that mistakenly refer to it as X Windows.

Yo la tengo:

[rodentia]

Java, emacs and XML all suck.

Re:beginning of the end?

[DrWhizBang]

Wow. It's obvious that you've been following this really closely. Bloat like updated drivers, bugfixes, and other fetures that everyone else has certainly do not belong in XFree86. I hope the XFree86 developers stick by their guns and refuse evil bloatware like back-buffers, vector graphics, and portability.

Re:beginning of the end?

[Anonymous Coward]

...because XFree86 isn't bloated at all, no, of course not ;)

disclaimer: this is not a troll post! i'm running Xfree86 right now!!

Is this the beginning of the end?

[ENOENT]

No.

That was easy! Ask me another one!

Thomas!

[Anonymous Coward]

So Harold is a bit upset with you, but there's no need to draw additional attention, is there?

Re:Maybe XFree has had its day

[tuffy]

The reality is that 99.9% of X applications have both the client application and X server on the same machine. So why have such a complicated networking layer to draw a window on a screen? Seems like a lot of unnecessary overhead to me.

That's why when an X client and X server share a machine, XFree86 doesn't use the network layer whatsoever. And every time someone complains about that nonexistant "overhead" when X11 is discussed, God kills a kitten. X11 and Free86 have enough genuine warts of their own without having to make up more. So think of the kittens and forget the "network overhead".

Schism!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because of that gay Bishop in New Hampshire, isn't it.

Re:Perseverance

[Anonymous Coward]

no wonder that project takes 10 years, you can't even express your idea clearly, i can't even imagine your code. Why are you running cygwin on windows while you have many other options?

Re:Just like Gnome was the end of KDE

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would want to use a DE with a smelly foot as its mascot? ;-)

Re:beginning of the end?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bloat! There is a x86 emulator in the XFree86 source. The source is in .../xc/extras/x86emu.

Being the fool that I am - I told Keith Packard that my new fast box would build the xfree86 xserver in 25 min. He then showed me that his old 300Mhz laptop could build his version of the xserver in 5 min. He said it was because he didn't have a lot of bloat - no x86 emulator or unicode conversion. His xserver is also a lot smaller.

Re:Leaving?

[aled]

Why, yes. It is called Windows XP (see the X is moved to the end of the name and the P must mean something else). Millions of VB programmer use this version.

let /. figure it out

[ozten]

So this IS the end then.