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

Re: backports kernel: support for t430s laptop in backports?

On 12/14/12 06:07, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 12/14/12 10:38, Bastian Blank wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 08:18:27AM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote:
>>> I surely understand that most Debian folks are volunteers
>>> spending a lot of precious free time on the project and
>>> have to choose what to work on.
>> So. Are you prepared to do the work?
> I started on a backport yesterday, but I got tangled up in the
> large chain of tiny x11proto-*-dev and lib*-dev packages needed
> to build the next one. The plan is to backport at least one
> package per day in a spare minute.
> Remind me, what was the reason why xorg was split into small
> chunks?
>>> On the other hand, many enterprises cannot afford to switch
>>> over to Wheezy immediately after release date (March 2013?).
>> They had several months to prepare. What is the problem?
> I could live with Squeeze for several years, but I am running
> out of supported hardware. Unfortunately I cannot upgrade just
> the hardware dependent packages (kernel, Xwindow drivers,
> firmware, etc.) within Squeeze and keep the rest. Somehow the
> new glibc sneaks in, and I have to upgrade _all_ packages to
> Wheezy. Thats a huge amount of work and a very high risk.
> Enterprises try to avoid both.
> The really sad part is that Nvidias proprietary driver is very
> easy to install on Squeeze, even if you use the most recent
Did you try the proprietary driver in Wheezy or with today's git, they
are lagging in there own support areas.

> hardware. Meaning no offense, but how comes that the open Intel
> driver is an issue here?
The open drivers need volunteers to work on strange or out of the
ordinary use cases.  The big difference is who is effectively able to
perform any post testing alterations and re-test.

What's blocking open development is knowledge and what's blocking
proprietary development is subjection.

>>> Squeeze has to last at least for another year.
>> Squeeze will get security support for another year. This does not mean
>> it will get new features via backports.
> Understood.
> Regards
> Harri

Reply to: