On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 08:21:35AM -0800, J.C. Roberts wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 08:27:08 -0600 Marco Peereboom <sl...@peereboom.us>
> wrote:
>
> > You are not the one paying the fixers unfortunately. The only
> > influence you have is what Matthieu suggested.
>
> Thanks Marco. If I'm reading Mathieu and you correctly, I have to take
> this upstream to get it fixed, and of course, this means writing a
> *VERY* long and detailed bug report to make things as easy as possible
> for those who could/might fix it.
>
> I've tried searching for and reading existing bug reports on the
> intel(4) driver, and specifically the 845G chipset, but there are
> *TONS* of them. A lot of the existing reports are poorly written
> but since the buggy behavior is inconsistent, many of the existing bug
> reports are probably duplicates, well, at least in some sense.
>
> I just singed up for freedesktop.org this morning, and I'm collecting
> the needed Xorg.0.log's with full debug info, descriptions and whatnot.
> It's going to take quite a while experiment with it and write up all the
> buggy behavior variations. If I do an absolutely stellar job on the bug
> report, they might take the time to look at it.
Please add me (zer...@googlemail.com) to the CC. I try and keep an eye
on OpenBSD related bug reports.
>
> After watching the old i810(4) driver work fine for me, and seeing
> all the bug reports on the new intel(4) driver, I've got this bad
> feeling that nobody cared to test it on the older chipsets... i.e. they
> are not getting paid to care about "legacy" support.
>
> Would this be a correct assessment?
>From discussing with the intel guys, their actually split. Probably more
towards "fuck legacy" though.
-0-
--
Cigarette, n.:
A fire at one end, a fool at the other, and a bit of tobacco in
between.
