Re: [ubuntu-x] Status of kernel X drivers

2010-02-28 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Sun, 2010-02-21 at 23:20 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...] > I think this is something we will also consider doing in Debian. A year > from now I expect nv to be dead and radeon UMS to be removed upstream, > making it impractical to backport new hardware support. Given that, the > maintenance

Re: [ubuntu-x] Status of kernel X drivers

2010-02-24 Thread Julien Cristau
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 23:20:14 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Fedora has been backporting drm (and nouveau) for a long time but it's > not so clear what means for RHEL. > > I think this is something we will also consider doing in Debian. A year > from now I expect nv to be dead and radeon UMS t

Re: [ubuntu-x] Status of kernel X drivers

2010-02-22 Thread Eric Anholt
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 23:20:14 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 14:40 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote: > [...] > > From apw's Kernel Summary, about why we are going with 2.6.32: > > > > The primary decision for the kernel team at UDS is to choose the base > > kernel version for

Re: [ubuntu-x] Status of kernel X drivers

2010-02-21 Thread Ben Hutchings
On Thu, 2010-02-18 at 14:40 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote: [...] > From apw's Kernel Summary, about why we are going with 2.6.32: > > The primary decision for the kernel team at UDS is to choose the base > kernel version for the release. For Lucid this will be 2.6.32. This > version has ju