Re: [linuxiran] XFree86 4.3

[Aryan Ameri]

On Wednesday 14 May 2003 12:22, Arash Zeini wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 May 2003 13:01, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> > On Monday 12 May 2003 17:24, Arash Zeini wrote:
> > > On Monday 12 May 2003 17:00, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> > > > I looked at it, and the patch is pretty simple, it adds the
> > > > unicode values of arabic to X. It also does include JEH, PEH,
> > > > GAF and CHEH.
> > >
> > > You have to explain! I am not sure how it adds the values to X.
> > > Remember that it is not enough to add the vlaues to the xkb map.
> > > That's waht we have in our map too. The problem is that these
> > > values are not passed to different X components/layers correctly.
> > > For KDE this problem has been taken care at the Qt level.
> > > The lines that you see in the patch are comments, I guess as kind
> > > of a reference.
> >
> > Hey, I ain't a programmer, but beleive me, I have the ability to
> > distiguish comments from code !!
> >
> > OK, maybe that one patch doesn't add Farsi characters to X, but
> > then what is it? you say it adds Farsi to X keyboard map? And what
> > is the result of that?
>
> No I am saying that the patch modifies the Arabic keyboard and it
> adds the comments to the map file as a point of reference.
> I do not remember the patch now in detail but it was not adding any
> Farsi issues to the keyboard.
>
> > I really want to ask this question, what does it take to add farsi
> > to X? What kind of a patch does such a thing? What are we looking
> > for?
> >
> > You always say "For KDE this problem has been taken care at the Qt
> > level." Well, it does seem to me that this taken care of, is just a
> > patch to Qt, and that Qt is just a toolkit. What should we do to
> > take care of it, in the X level? X is also a toolkit, they patched
> > Qt, and added Farsi to it, now, what does it take to patch X and
> > add farsi to it?
>
> A good question, probably best asked on the right X mailing list.
> Behdad had patched Qt at the time, maybe he can contribute to X as
> well! Behdad?
>
> > > > Although it assumes that these are also arabic letters. I am
> > > > not familiar with the Unicode table, and I don't know wether
> > > > according to Unicode, if they are considered arabic or not. But
> > > > anyway, the patch adds all arabic and farsi characters to X.
> > >
> > > Yes Farsi is part of the Arabic code page. I.e., it is a "subset"
> > > of Arabic. The same applies to all the other languages that use a
> > > modified Arabic script.
> >
> > Good to know
> >
> > > Agreeing with ArashB I assume that the patch or improvement has
> > > happened somewhere in the lines of GTK or the like.
> >
> > Completely disagree. Mozilla might build on top of Gtk, but I can
> > assure you that OOo doesn't have anything to do with Gtk. Sun
> > doesn't use any toolkit, not Qt, Not MFC, not .Net, Not Motif, and
> > not Gtk, in building OOo. OOo uses it's own (rather inefficent)
> > structure.
>
> It looks now as if RH patched X. We have to take a closer look at the
> avaialbel patches.
> I ask myself why these patches aren't in X???

Hehe, because hundereds of patches are sent to XFree86, that never find 
their way into it. because, only very few people have write access to 
XFree86. because, the XFree86 drivers (owners), don't want XFree86 to 
be an open project. Because, XFree86 is really slow, in terms of adding 
patches and drivers.

 ATI has been sending drivers to XFree86 for 2 years now, and non of the 
drivers that they sent during last year, found their way into XFree86. 
I wonder when ATI will become tired of sending drivers to XFree86 and 
see them not found their way into the project.

Anyway, it seems Keith packard and a bunch of former XFree86 developers 
are on their way to fork XFree86. Take a look at http://www.xwin.org

Cheers

-- 
/* The best part about banging your 
head against a wall is when you stop.
Same with using windows */

Aryan Ameri