On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 03:00:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2004 at 01:46:37PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 07:43:45PM +0200, Manolis Tzanidakis wrote: > > > Package: xserver-xfree86 > > > Version: 4.3.0-7 > > > Severity: normal > > > Followup-For: Bug #234025 > > > > > > I have exactly the same problem w/ my new & shiny Radeon 9200 (thank > > > god for this thread, I have X working now, thanx to it). > > > I built XF86 4.4.0 on my LFS partition & it works with & without the > > > s-video cable plugged it. > > > It is possible to back-port ati drivers from 4.4.0rc1 or something > > > (before the change in license) ? > > > > Notice that if Branden would enable the driver-sdk patch i submitted > > such a long time ago, > > It wasn't suitable for merge as it stood. IIRC, Daniel Stone > volunteered to shepherd it in, but ran out of time to do this. > > If someone will step up and responsibility for it, it might get in. But > dumping patches that have problems and/or won't apply is not sufficient.
Oh, come on, that was the early version, i later sent you a corrected version, and you said you understood what was needed, and would make the needed adaptation yourself. The patch was against 4.3.0-0pre1v4. It is no patch, just a bit of stuff needed in the control file to generate the sdk package (including description) and the needed change in the debian/rules for generating it. The rest of the patch you mentioned has already been checked in upstream, both with the 4.4 branhc as in the 4.3 bugfix branch, and has thus been included in the current package. The only thing needed is the one to enable it. So, if you still have critics on said patch i sent to you, and you said you would include later, but didn't want to do before XFree86 entered unstable, which i understand, but i already worked this patch over two time, without any effect than it get lost, i have more usefull things to do with my time than work for nothing. Now, if i have a guarantee than the new try will not just get ignored i will have a look again. > It's a wishlist item, and is being prioritized accordingly. Take a look > at XFree86's bug list. Yeah, sure, but the fix is trivial, and will not have any sideeffect apart from generating a package containing a tarball, so it should be an easily granted wish, if the will to grant it was there. > If you have time to work on it again, great. Please see the HACKING > document: > > http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/xsf/XFree86/HACKING.txt > > ...and scroll to the bottom. Yeah, sure, and you will babysit me through it too, right ? How do you think i have been building stuff previously ? The main thing that is missing in your document, is that you need a damned 5Go of free disk space. Back then i erased that many stuff from my disk, in order to prepare the patch that was ignored, but i don't have this free space anymore. Just apply the latest patch i sent you, it is suitable, at least you told me so. It should be in the debian-x mailing list archive too, wait i search it. ... A, here is the mail, dated November 2 : On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 01:07:14PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > My gripes with your patch are nothing I can't fix, so you don't need > to send an updated one. > > Keep in mind, though, that the SDK/DDK package is a post-4.3.0-1 > issue. Well, this clearly gives to understand that you will apply the patch in post 4.3.0-1, and that you don't need any further action from my part, apart some proding. Anyway, the patch is here : http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2003/debian-x-200311/msg00002.html Friendly, Sven Luther
