On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 08:09:54PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 12:38:05PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> >
> > The input code is used only for the USB support. If we want to keep
> > that, we're going to have to make it build. What I would do:
> > - #undef the necessa
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 12:38:05PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> The input code is used only for the USB support. If we want to keep
> that, we're going to have to make it build. What I would do:
> - #undef the necessary constants until it compiles
> - #define HasLinuxInput ON explicitly
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:47:16AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:00:13AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >
> > However, unfortunately, some things in the XFree86 tree (the Wacom input
> > module, at least) build differently on kernel 2.4 systems than they do on
> > 2.2 sy
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 09:32:30AM -0600, Phil Fraering wrote:
> I'd like to ask _what_ it sees as being different about kernel 2.4 from
> kernel 2.2. Just guessing from the fact that it's an input device, and
> in a generic sense the input layer has changed on 2.4 systems than on
> 2.2 systems...
Our friendly X-developer, Branden, wrote:
(gee, how do I write that so it doesn't sound like
something from Marvel comics?)
> --rwEMma7ioTxnRzrJ
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> I've got a patch that succes
On Sat, Dec 09, 2000 at 07:00:13AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> However, unfortunately, some things in the XFree86 tree (the Wacom input
> module, at least) build differently on kernel 2.4 systems than they do on
> 2.2 systems. More to the point, building xf86Wacom.c flat out fails on 2.4
>
6 matches
Mail list logo
