Patch audit: recover remaining upstream patches

This integrates the remaining upstream patches which had to be merged. Index: TODO === --- TODO(revision 309) +++ TODO(working copy) @@ -33,17 +23,6 @@ * patches to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/{mga,renditi

patch audit

000_stolen_from_sourceforge_wacom_driver.diff xorg patch has the same driver version as xfree86 one. The only differences are some changes in manpage (changing XFree86 and XF86Config-4 to __xservername__ and __xconfigfile__). 003b_xfs_fixes.diff Ported patch attache

Re: patch audit - 099*.diff

Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> rediffed patches attached for all of these. >> $Id: 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff 1703 2004-07-29 09:52:03Z= > branden $ >>=20 > Do not apply this patch. It breaks all UTF-8 locales, because it also > modifies the way locale data is proce

Re: Patch audit 099 patches

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 02:03:04AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Um, David, you seem to have gotten slightly confused in revision 286: > > - 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff -- lost > - 099i_pro_savage_ddr_set_use_bios_to_false.diff -- lost > - 099s_selinux_support.diff -- lost > - 09

Re: patch audit - 099*.diff

On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 22:09:39 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > 099i_pro_savage_ddr_set_use_bios_to_false.diff -- lost According to the ubuntu changelog, this patch was removed as not required anymore in xorg 6.8.1-0.0 Cheers, Julien Cristau -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a

Re: patch audit - 099*.diff

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 18:18:42 +0200, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 03:49:10PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 22:09:39 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff -- lost > > s/lost/removed/ > [snipped patch] > > Do no

Re: patch audit - 099*.diff

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 03:49:10PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 22:09:39 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff -- lost s/lost/removed/ > rediffed patches attached for all of these. > $Id: 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff 1

Re: patch audit - 099*.diff

te.diff -- lost > 099v_fontserver_fix_SEGV.diff -- lost > 099x_xdm_support_logfile_rotation.diff -- lost rediffed patches attached for all of these. The debian/rules patch-audit target fails because of fuzz/offsets in 078_xdm_log_sourcing_better.diff and 099g_xkb_symbols_polish_fix_keypad_sepa

Patch audit 099 patches

Um, David, you seem to have gotten slightly confused in revision 286: - 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff -- lost - 099i_pro_savage_ddr_set_use_bios_to_false.diff -- lost - 099s_selinux_support.diff -- lost - 099t_xkb_remove_hidden_attributes.diff -- lost - 099u_mkdirhier_rewrite.diff --

Patch audit "F": 090-098

090_xkb_fix_uk_macintosh_problems.diff -- present and ported 091_xkb_implement_compose:caps.diff -- present and ported 092_Xserver_sunffb_xaa_extension.diff -- present and ported 093_xkb_fix_macintosh_problems.diff "Keypad equal" fix is missing and needs to be ported. The other fix has been com

Patch audit "F" -- rest of 060-079

071_nonexecutable_malloced_mem.diff -- upstream 072_Xserver_fb_convert_RGB_to_BGR.diff -- present and forward-ported 074_freetype_fix_underlining.diff -- upstream 077_xdm_honor_request_port_zero.diff Missing, needs to be forward-ported. 079_ati_radeon_fix_power_resume.diff -- upstream 087_SECUR

Patch audit "E": remainder of 060-069

061_savage_driver_1.1.27t.diff Upstream has an altered version of 1.1.27 derived from the DRI trunk. I think that that had already merged 1.1.27t. Furthermore, this patch appears to have a *reversionary* effect. I believe the patch is actually simply wrong. 063_fix_weak_deps.diff Complic

patch audit - 099*.diff

Hi, here are my comments on most of the 099* patches. 099a_improve_search_for_libXcursor.diff -- present under same name 099b_Xft_FreeType_2.1.7_build_fix.diff -- upstream 099c_support_loadable_external_Xcursor_lib.diff -- present under same name 099d_Imake.rules_fix_RawCppFileTarget.diff -- lost

patch audit (002_xdm_fixes)

Ok. lists.debian.org seem to not grok patches of 100k+. Now gzipped version. The fully rediffed patch attached with the following changes/issues: * Part of whitespace only changes removed * Added some more decapitalization. * Large part of programs/xdm/daemon.c is rewritten to make it similar

patch audit: patches 101 -> 451

Hi, most of these patches are now included upstream. Only patch 304 is missing (it was added to the xfree86 package in January 2005). 101_type6_xkb_support.diff -- upstream 104_sparc_fix_GL_library.diff -- upstream 150_powerpc_build_nv_driver.diff -- upstream 200_alpha_xpm_get_long64.diff -- upstr

Patch audit patch "C" (or is it "D"?)

For various reasons, I'm omitting the "delete this from the list" patches to TODO at the moment. I'll be taking a short break now. More this evening perhaps. :-) - Patch audit. - 049_Xserver_recognize_Linux_2.6_proc_bus_pci.diff - different, but equiva

Patch audit patch "C"

- Patch audit. - 039_mkfontdir_force_correct_perms.diff: Irrelevant, as mkfontdir is now essentially an alias to mkfontscale, and the patched file is gone. - 043_ati_r128_update_chip_identification.diff: Forward-ported by me, attached below. -- This space intentionally left blank

Patch audit patch "B"

- TODO update for patch audit. - 027_ati_driver_message_cleanups.diff - upstream - 028_fbdev_depth24_support.diff - upstream - 029_xinerama_needs_xlib.h.diff - upstream - 030_Xserver_and_driver_region_primitive_fixups.diff - not needed; it's a kludge to allow the ATI backport to

Patch audit patch "A"

I'm "lettering" them now. ;-) This is little bitty bits. - Update TODO for patch audit. - break out things which need to be backported from upstream - 011_SECURITY_makedepend_safer.diff present unchanged. Comments updated by me because Dawes references are

Patch audit

012_Xaw_StripChart_fix.diff -- already present 013_xkb_symbols_euro_support.diff -- missing. Rediffed patch attached 014_startx_hostname_fix.diff -- already present 015_vesa_ifdef_afb_calls.diff -- already present and ported 016_ICE_subprotocol_reply_fix.diff -- already present 017_fix_Xlib_d

trying to help with the patch audit

Hi, I've looked over patches 500->914 in the xorg-x11 and xfree86 svn repos. "ok" means that the patch, or a very similar one, is still present in xorg-x11. 500_s390_support.diff - ok 600_amd64_support.diff - * patch to xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/loader/elfloader.c lost * s/AMD64/x86_64/ in

Re: Patch audit TODO update

On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 01:58:17PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Daniel Stone wrote: > >xfree86 got updates after we forked that I never merged back. > :-) > > Do you happen to know the revision range I should be looking in? i.e What's > the fork point, or the last point in the xfree86 patche

Re: Patch audit continued, mostly locales

On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 01:54:55PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Daniel Stone wrote: > > Already been submitted, and it's blocking on someone from Sun who, > > AFAICT, hasn't meaningfully existed in any X.Org sense for years now. > Eeeew. What is this Sun guy complaining about? Can't the curre

Re: Patch audit TODO update

Daniel Stone wrote: > > + * Portions appear to be formatting changes and rearrangements > > + which probably should be dropped if they're not accepted upstream > > Does it really matter? It just makes the patch harder to read and causes unnecessary interference with subsequent patches (

Re: Patch audit TODO update

Daniel Stone wrote: >xfree86 got updates after we forked that I never merged back. :-) Do you happen to know the revision range I should be looking in? i.e What's the fork point, or the last point in the xfree86 patches at which everything was merged to Ubuntu? Knowing this would make the port

Re: Patch audit continued, mostly locales

If (3) is wrong, it shows the necessity of a patch audit. >> + -- Branden's grammar fixes deserve to return. > >s/return/be ported Yes. >> + -- more likely, the xfree86 version is right and the version from Ubuntu >> + lost stuff. > >s/lost stuff/didn't ge

Re: Patch audit continued, mostly locales [#6]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:29:01AM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > OK, it's another update to TODO. UNfortunately, the locales patch seems > to have lost a bunch of stuff (with no explanation), and several others > also need some TLC, so this patch makes TODO blow up a bit. *sigh* Maybe > I oug

Re: Patch audit TODO update [#5]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:06:37PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > +003_linux.cf_and_xfree86.cf.diff -- NEEDS HELP > + -- present under same name (with changes) > + -- New patch has a few issues left to check: > + * comments indicate that this belongs in the 900-series; but some of it > +

Patch audit continued, mostly locales [#6]

OK, it's another update to TODO. UNfortunately, the locales patch seems to have lost a bunch of stuff (with no explanation), and several others also need some TLC, so this patch makes TODO blow up a bit. *sigh* Maybe I ought to split it into several TODOs. --- TODO2005-06-08 00:26:24.1

Patch audit TODO update [#5]

Eeew. This one was ugly. Just updates the TODO, but unfortunately there's a fair amount of unclear and messy stuff in the part I went through. Index: TODO === --- TODO(revision 150) +++ TODO(working copy) @@ -46,13 +

Patch audit status?

So, I was thinking I could help with the patch audit going from the xfree86 repo to the xorg-x11 repo, since I had so much fun with the last patch audit. However, there's nothing which actually indicates (a) what still has to be checked (b) what has already been checked Since I don'