On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 10:10:38AM +1200, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On 26/03/2005, at 8:30 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
>
> >On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 04:45:57PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> >>On 18/03/2005, at 8:04 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >>>If an i915 patch is prepared, works, and has been sign
On 26/03/2005, at 8:30 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 04:45:57PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
On 18/03/2005, at 8:04 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
If an i915 patch is prepared, works, and has been signed off on by
i810/i830/i845/i855/i865 as well as i915 users, then the patch
sub
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 04:45:57PM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On 18/03/2005, at 8:04 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
> >If an i915 patch is prepared, works, and has been signed off on by
> >i810/i830/i845/i855/i865 as well as i915 users, then the patch submitter
> >and these testers can join me in m
On 18/03/2005, at 8:04 AM, Branden Robinson wrote:
[CCing debian-release; please follow-up to both lists.]
Not until I've got something more to say than "OK, I'm working on it"...
If an i915 patch is prepared, works, and has been signed off on by
i810/i830/i845/i855/i865 as well as i915 users, then
[CCing debian-release; please follow-up to both lists.]
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 08:57:33AM +1300, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On balance (and not just because I have a lab full of machines with i915
> chipsets to look after), I think that we really ought to try to get this
> into sarge. It won't be lon
5 matches
Mail list logo
