On 07/14/2011 09:41 PM, Alexander Wirt wrote:
> Panayiotis Karabassis schrieb am Thursday, den 14. July 2011:
>> On 07/14/2011 09:29 PM, Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
>>>> The third problem would be, that we need the allownes of one of the
>>>> backports-ftp-masters to upload a slighty modified package which is not
>>>> in testing. The changes of fglrx 11-4 => 11-6 and xorg multiarch support
>>>> are just to big:
>>>> me@gnu:~/Coding/fglrx/fglrx-driver$ diff -Naur tags/11-4-2/debian
>>>> trunk/debian --exclude=.svn|diffstat|tail -n 1
>>>> 48 files changed, 1054 insertions(+), 1332 deletions(-)
>>> Sorry, I don't understand this part. According to aptitude, 1:10-9-3 is
>>> in Squeeze right now. Where does 11-4 come in? And what do you mean a
>>> slightly modified version?
>> Again sorry, after reading the Contribute section in  I understood.
>> Rather irresponsible and hasty of me, so sorry!
>> So would you prefer that we upload Testing versions as they come out?
> Ok, here is a small comment from me with my debian backports ftpmaster hat on:
> we expect maintainers of backports to be experienced debian developers. Best
> would be if they maintain the package also in Debian. Otherwise we have to
> reject the package.
Harsh. But since you bring it up: it would be trivial to get
fglrx-driver to work on Squeeze. In fact the dependencies are really
already satisfiable with packages in Squeeze, it's just that
debian/control has stricter requirements than is should.
So either the fglrx developers could provide a Squeeze package with
minimal effort, unless ATI drops support for Squeeze in the future, or
they could modify the dependencies of the wheezy/sid package so that it
can be installed with apt-pinning. In fact this is how I install nvidia
Your decision, but I think it would benefit many Squeeze users to have
an up-to-date fglrx driver package, without being forced to upgrade to
testing or unstable.