On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 21:21:47 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote: > Le 21/05/2012 21:17, Cyril Brulebois a écrit : > >That means more udebs, more stuff in the d-i image/initramfs. I'm not > >sure it's worth the trouble. Quite the contrary, in fact. > > > >It looks to me like a separate build is better as far as d-i is concerned. > How "costy" would those udeb be? Those are small libraries... > Having to rebuild gtk has a cost as well, not only it increases the > build time for it quite a lot, it also means the code build is using > mostly untested codepaths (they are very few users or distributions > trying to not use those xorg libraries) > I'm willing to maintain those code paths, if that's all it takes. FWIW the X server in the installer doesn't even support composite. I can see how adding libXdamage might make some sense. I don't think adding randr would, since we use the fbdev driver.
Cheers, Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
