Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X.org fork, XLibre
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 00:28:39 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <10259rn$4dma$4@dont-email.me>
References: <101v47c$2c6k0$1@dont-email.me> <68438e89@news.ausics.net>
	<102376i$2c6k0$4@dont-email.me> <684539dc@news.ausics.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2025 02:28:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5752efaa82bad3e61c79f97a111f3c02";
	logging-data="145098"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/9Hidw1YeFeTJvnn6iNnAc"
User-Agent: Pan/0.162 (Pokrosvk)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8mETnqPnDALRaNebgV+m2SoJzXc=

On 8 Jun 2025 17:21:00 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> I read that as: the code for the drivers doesn't usually need to be
> changed, but they need to be recompiled, so existing X.Org driver
> packages won't work. Same as with Linux kernel drivers.

It is not the kernel that calls into the X server, it is the X server that 
calls into the kernel. So I wouldn’t expect any kernel changes to be 
necessary.

> I suspect distro package maintainers won't consider it worth that
> much effort given how many separate X packages they usually have.

There aren’t that many different driver add-on packages, are there?