Improving Our Docs

Daniel Holbach daniel.holbach at
Wed Jul 3 07:20:15 UTC 2013

Hello Jeff,

Thanks for your suggestions!

On 02.07.2013 18:31, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> The list of psuedo-pretty instructions looks more than sufficient in
> terms of level of detail.  Just one suggestion.
> If the set of deps for the patched xserver and mesa are the same as
> development tip xserver and mesa, its sufficient to just say that. If
> there are any deps beyond what those upstream projects need to build
> their development tip, then it is sufficent and necessary to just name
> those.  Or to restart simply:
> "Assume the system is prepped to build  the unpatched upstream
> dependences as a starting point"

Yes, I guess that makes sense. I posted them on the list to make sure
that more knowledgeable engineers could have a look over them and see if
there's anything in there which probably doesn't make sense. It's the
minimum of what I had to install in a chroot to make the build work.

> And a couple of other questions.
> Daniel, assuming Mir builds.. is this sufficient to get Mir up and
> running and test mir native clients in a repeatable way as part the
> documented instructions for testing? Same with xmir.  If I want to
> smoke fvwm2 on top of xmir, is this sufficient? Or do I need to also
> build mir capable lightdm as the dm to manage creating the xmir backed
> session?

I'll leave this question to the more experienced developers.

> I am a bit concerned that Daniel and  Robert are suggesting different
> git branches for the patched mesa and xserver.  Are they equivalent
> for basic smoke testing? Perhaps you guys need to huddle up and come
> to agreement as to which specific branches should be codified for
> externals now to pull when doing the first build from source,
> especially now a new ppa has been created and codified in the docs to
> replace the staging ppa. is the new ppa automation pulling for the
> branches that Robert pointed me to?  I would hope that the specific
> branches in the build from source instructions match what is getting
> pulled into the ppa automation.

I just tried to make use of the branches which Robert suggested. If
anyone can help specify this any further, let me know.

Have a great day,

Get involved in Ubuntu development!
Follow @ubuntudev on

More information about the Mir-devel mailing list