On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 02:49:25PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Julien Cristau
> Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 15:52:20 +0200
>
> > I plan to revert it for lenny r2, and if time permits I'll try to
> > make the xserver-xorg package generate an xorg.conf with Driver set
> > to fbdev instead..
>
>
From: Julien Cristau
Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 15:52:20 +0200
> I plan to revert it for lenny r2, and if time permits I'll try to
> make the xserver-xorg package generate an xorg.conf with Driver set
> to fbdev instead..
Indeed, that's likely to work much better.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to deb
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 13:41:08 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 12:49 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 01:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > No, I would have said that if time is tight at least we can use
> > > "fbdev" as the Xorg driver for PCI devices
On Wed, 2009-02-25 at 13:41 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 12:49 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 01:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > No, I would have said that if time is tight at least we can use
> > > "fbdev" as the Xorg driver for PCI devices on sp
From: Julien Cristau
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 13:41:08 +0100
> On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 12:49 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 01:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > No, I would have said that if time is tight at least we can use
> > > "fbdev" as the Xorg driver for PCI devices o
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 12:49 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 01:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > No, I would have said that if time is tight at least we can use
> > "fbdev" as the Xorg driver for PCI devices on sparc until we have a
> > better fix for Xorg.
>
> We can probably
On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 01:21 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> No, I would have said that if time is tight at least we can use
> "fbdev" as the Xorg driver for PCI devices on sparc until we have a
> better fix for Xorg.
We can probably do that for r1.
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debi
From: Josip Rodin
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:45:27 +0100
> But then, it would have been completely your prerogative to respond to that
> simply by saying - DTRT and go upgrade X, patching old X is a waste of my
> time, and I guess nobody wanted to risk hearing that answer? :)
No, I would have said
From: Josip Rodin
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:20:39 +0100
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 04:58:08PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > So you're saying that X working is more important than machines
> > actually booting at all? These priorities are wrong.
>
> When N (where N > 0) users complain about dead
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 12:28:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > So you're saying that X working is more important than machines
> > > actually booting at all? These priorities are wrong.
> >
> > When N (where N > 0) users complain about dead X, and 0 users complain
> > about not being able to
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 04:58:08PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> So you're saying that X working is more important than machines
> actually booting at all? These priorities are wrong.
When N (where N > 0) users complain about dead X, and 0 users complain
about not being able to boot, the prioritie
From: Jurij Smakov
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 23:05:21 +
> To give a little bit of background, this patch was supposed to fix
> http://bugs.debian.org/500358. Bug trail contains all the gory
> details, but the crux of the problem (as I understand it) is the
> following: the commit [0] into the
On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 02:51:05AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jurij Smakov
> Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 10:45:31 +
>
> > Thanks for pointing it out, David.
>
> Please contact me in the future if you guys want to add non-trivial
> sparc specific changes. That's how you can keep stuff like
On 2009-02-08 17:33, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Something like this:
Added.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 03:49:22PM +0100, W. Martin Borgert wrote:
> On 2009-02-08 00:07, Luk Claes wrote:
> > I think it's best to delay that to r1. Can someone please provide a text
> > for the release notes to describe the problem, TIA?
>
> Hi all: Please send me a paragraph of text ASAP.
> (Or
On 2009-02-08 00:07, Luk Claes wrote:
> I think it's best to delay that to r1. Can someone please provide a text
> for the release notes to describe the problem, TIA?
Hi all: Please send me a paragraph of text ASAP.
(Or file a bug with the proposed text against "release-notes".)
--
To UNSUBSCRI
Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi
>
> We introduced a workaround by reverting a removal in the kernel to allow
> the current X.Org on sparc work. However this patch is not supportable
> and breaks all newer machines quite badly.
>
> This means that we have to back it out again and the only question is if
Hi
We introduced a workaround by reverting a removal in the kernel to allow
the current X.Org on sparc work. However this patch is not supportable
and breaks all newer machines quite badly.
This means that we have to back it out again and the only question is if
we will do that for r0 or r1.
Bas
Package: linux-2.6
Version: 2.6.26-13
Severity: grave
I consider this RC. We'll break X.org either for r0 or r1.
debian-sparc: Please provide someone who wants to take over sparc
architecture maintenance of the Linux packages.
On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 10:45:31AM +, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> On Fr
19 matches
Mail list logo
