[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#568168: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau needs nouveau bits from libdrm



On 2010-03-23 14:14 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 14:02:19 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> I had just begun to tackle that task, using the ubuntu branch from
>> xserver-xorg-video-nouveau git as a starting point.
>> 
> Oh, cool.  Thanks for doing this.

I have some good news, since (after fixing #568162) I indeed managed to
build a working package.  At least X has been running for about two
hours which is a promising start. :-)

>> >  The libdrm bits are just a detail after that.
>> 
>> So?  My attempt to build xserver-xorg-video-nouveau was shortcut here:
>> 
>> ,----
>> | checking if DPMSExtension is defined... yes
>> | checking for LIBDRM_NOUVEAU... configure: error: Package requirements (libdrm_nouveau) were not met:
>> | 
>> | No package 'libdrm_nouveau' found
>> | 
>
> Right, there's some work that needs to be done on libdrm.  Enabling the
> nouveau part, and probably reverting to something compatible with the
> 2.6.33 ABI.  I believe ubuntu also has this in lucid, fwiw.

Yes, it was just a matter of copying their patch which reverts the ABI
changes and doing some Ediff runs in Emacs to enable the libdrm-nouveau*
packages.

> If you want access to pkg-xorg git to push your work there, just ask.

I think I don't want to trample over any of your existing branches yet,
so I would prefer to use a new branch, or publish my work on my
joachim-guest account on Alioth where you can pull from at your leisure.

I'm not sure how to do the merge.  While merging upstream-ubuntu into
upstream-experimental is a trivial fast-forward, and merging
upstream-experimental into debian-experimental is also a no-brainer,
merging ubuntu into debian-experimental resulted in quite a few things
that needed to be backed out; for instance their patch 02_nouveau_bgnr
leads to FTBFS on Debian, and I'm not sure you want all the Ubuntu
history in debian/changelog either.

So it might be better to "merge --squash" that branch, since otherwise
we might create problems for Ubuntu (in their later merges) if we revert
many of their actions.  What do you think?

Sven



Reply to: