Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 09:07:34 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
>
>> And in 2.6.31-rc6, KMS is not stable enought to be used for my day-to-day
>> work. It even leads to data corruption. See #545517
>> Since I remove KMS (ie since my bug report), I had no problem at all
>> (w
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 09:07:34 +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> And in 2.6.31-rc6, KMS is not stable enought to be used for my day-to-day
> work. It even leads to data corruption. See #545517
> Since I remove KMS (ie since my bug report), I had no problem at all
> (with many many suspend-resume c
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 09:07:34AM +0200, Vincent Danjean wrote:
> Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> >> One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
> >> their Q4 2009 release (meaning December this year, so probably
Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>> One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
>> their Q4 2009 release (meaning December this year, so probably something
>> we'll want for squeeze, depending on the freeze date you pic
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 18:05 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> [ Remove -release, this is technical stuff. ]
>
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 01:31:36PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:36:58 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > Is KMS backward compatible with older versions of the i
[ Remove -release, this is technical stuff. ]
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 01:31:36PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:36:58 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Is KMS backward compatible with older versions of the intel driver?
> No :/
What happens when a old driver runs on a KMS
Le mercredi 09 septembre 2009 à 14:04 +0200, Andreas Barth a écrit :
> If not at X side, is it a possibility to either (a) add the new memory
> manager to lenny (I assume not), or (b) tell the users "you need to
> upgrade your kernel first" (and make the new X pre-depending somehow
> on the kernel
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 14:42:52 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 13:31 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:36:58 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 13:31 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:36:58 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
> > > their Q4 2009 release (mea
* Bastian Blank (wa...@debian.org) [090909 12:37]:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
> > their Q4 2009 release (meaning December this year, so probably something
> > we'll want for squeeze, dep
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:36:58 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
> > their Q4 2009 release (meaning December this year, so probably something
> > we'll want for s
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 11:37:18AM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
> their Q4 2009 release (meaning December this year, so probably something
> we'll want for squeeze, depending on the freeze date you pick).
Oh, no. Not again. It
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
> * How many "big" transitions will the upcoming changes cause? When
> should those happen? Can we do something to make them easier?
>
One more thing. Intel plans to deprecate userspace mode setting with
their Q4 2009 release (mean
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 16:06:13 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> What's the status about this? When do you think the X stack will be
> ready to migrate?
>
Currently the only blocker as far as I know is the fact that
xserver-xorg-video-intel locks up shortly after X startup on 865G chips.
I'm confident
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
>> * How many "big" transitions will the upcoming changes cause? When should
>> those
>> happen? Can we do something to make them easier?
>>
> Lately the big problems were related to the stability of the in
David Nusinow wrote:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
>> [other xsf members, feel free to chime in if I'm forgetting something or
>> saying something stupid :)]
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
>>
>>
>>> * Which major upstream releases of X.org are expected in the ne
Julien Cristau wrote:
[other xsf members, feel free to chime in if I'm forgetting something or
saying something stupid :)]
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
* Which major upstream releases of X.org are expected in the next two
years? Which of those are mate
On Sun, 2009-08-23 at 13:23 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
>
> > * Which major upstream releases of X.org are expected in the next two
> > years? Which of those are material for Debian stable, which might be a bit
> > flaky?
[other xsf members, feel free to chime in if I'm forgetting something or
saying something stupid :)]
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 14:41:24 +0200, Marc Brockschmidt wrote:
> * Which major upstream releases of X.org are expected in the next two
> years? Which of those are material for Debian stable,
Heya,
As announced on dda [RT1], we want to get an impression when releasing
Squeeze is feasible. We have proposed a (quite ambitious) freeze in December
2009, and some developers have noted that their planned changes wouldn't be
possible in this time frame. So, to find out when releasing would wo
20 matches
Mail list logo
