this is not a bug about some specific xorg version - it's rather about development policy. IMHO if you're adding some new flag, which determines some features, which was by default in previous versions, that flag should be enabled as far. since last weeks i've noticed problems with fonts (new flags: truetype-fonts type1-fonts, and earlier bitmap-fonts), java and even openmotif (coused by flag xprint). don't get me wrong - it's great you're adding new flags, so users can compile exactly what they want and have even more personalized system (well - that's main reason of choosing gentoo IMO), i just think that new versions of apps should have all features, which they had before upgrade by default... BTW: 2 new flags: truetype-fonts and type1-fonts aren't described in /usr/portage/profiles/use.* files (i've synced few hours ago, so it may be not up-to-date info)
If you're using 6.8.0-r2, perhaps you should pay attention to the fact that it's hard-masked. That's the only one with truetype-fonts and type1-fonts. # <spyderous@gentoo.org (12 Oct 2004) # work in progress =x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.0-r2 And no they aren't in use.* yet, because the names aren't set in stone yet and I'm still debating whether to change them to no* flags. I want to do this before committing something with the name of the flag in 60 different places (lots of make.defaults in profiles/). Probably things will be ready by the end of this weekend. It was a bug that libXp wasn't being built when USE="-xprint" and that has been fixed (#67400). bitmap-fonts is in the default USE now, and 6.8.0-r1 was just marked stable yesterday. Things are in ~arch for many reasons, one of which is so we can figure out what things people want by default and what they don't. =) Remember that ~arch means testing so you can't expect everything to work perfectly yet. I do empathize with your opinion of conserving the default, though some things that were previously built by default were unnecessarily so, IMHO. I'm not sure exactly what to resolve this as, so I just picked one that looked good.
*** Bug 67633 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
