On 13 April 2010 15:36, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 22:09:58 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
>
>> Is there any chance of backporting the Intel HD patches to 2.9?
>>
> That's certainly possible. I don't have the hardware or the time to do
> it, but if you (or anybody else) does tha
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 22:09:58 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> Is there any chance of backporting the Intel HD patches to 2.9?
>
That's certainly possible. I don't have the hardware or the time to do
it, but if you (or anybody else) does that backporting work, it's very
much a candidate for incl
On 7 April 2010 21:54, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:00:55 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
>
>> And the intel driver has been pretty stable now since 2.9. I'm not
>> saying there are new bugs but there hasn't been big changes besides
>> the removal of UMS code.
>>
> That's where w
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 15:00:55 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> And the intel driver has been pretty stable now since 2.9. I'm not
> saying there are new bugs but there hasn't been big changes besides
> the removal of UMS code.
>
That's where we'll have to agree to disagree, then, I guess.
Cheers
On 7 April 2010 14:31, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 15:19:03 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
>
>> It would be great if the upcoming Squeeze would support this platform
>> properly - all new laptops are using it and this would provide some
>> sort of future proof for the stable vers
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 15:19:03 +0100, Pedro Ribeiro wrote:
> I'm not asking because I want the latest and greatest driver on Debian
> (in case of the intel driver, you can hardly say the greatest...)
>
> As you might be aware, Intel recently launched a new platform for the
> core iX. This platf
Hello,
On 3 April 2010 20:53, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Pedro Ribeiro (03/04/2010):
>> Hi all,
>
> Hi,
>
>> However, as you are certainly aware the newer versions require KMS.
>
> hint: that might even be a reason for our keeping 2.11 in
> experimental.
>
>> This conflicts with the goals set a fe
Pedro Ribeiro (03/04/2010):
> Hi all,
Hi,
> However, as you are certainly aware the newer versions require KMS.
hint: that might even be a reason for our keeping 2.11 in
experimental.
> This conflicts with the goals set a few months ago that KMS would be
> shipped in Squeeze disabled. How do y
Hi all,
I have an Intel graphics card and I was wondering what are you
planning for Squeeze. The current Intel driver in unstable is 2.9,
which is already 2 releases old.
Are you keeping this as the release driver for Squeeze? With the
freeze happening probably in 6 months, this 2.9 driver will g
9 matches
Mail list logo
