Re: [directfb-dev] Re: Bug#341597: [ppc, d-i-gtk] installation report on b&w G3
On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 07:04:08AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2005 at 12:50:19AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:18:40AM +0100, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote:
> > > If the bug is fixed when hw-acceleration is disabled i think a good idea
> > > would be making the libdirectfb or the gtk-rootskel udeb containing anto
> > > /etc/directfbrc configuration file that contains
> > >
> > > #prevents DFB from using hardware acceleration
> > > no-hardware
> > > #lets user dumping screen by pressing "Stamp" key
> > > screenshot-dir=/
>
> Mmm, Attilio, i don't think this file should be hardcoded like that, but
> better provided by rootskel-gtk, or generated from rootskel-gtk at early
> runtime, as we may wish to make it configurable from /proc/cmdline, and do
> some more advanced matching depending on graphic card used or architecture, as
> i proposed yesterday.
Yes, the only option that makes sense in libdfb is no-hardware, and if
this may make the life for rootskel-gtk harder, then I can avoid
creating it.
> > Yep, I can add the file to the udeb on next upload. But it will go to
> > experimental as we are discouraged to do lib transitions at the
> > moment. I'll send a coordination mail once I plan to upload.
>
> Does the new DFB break ABI compatibiliy nd needs a new soname ? From the
> version number i kind of doubt that, but i may be wrong. If there is no ABI
> breakage and soname bump, then it is no lib transition, and a plain upload to
> unstable will do.
Well I'd not be doing lib transitions just for fun, so yes. =)
> Also, there are no many other packages which depend on dfb, i think, so even a
> ABI bumping transition is mostly OK i believe, not like if you bumped
> libstdc++ or the libgtk libs.
I've been doing the transitions using experimental and a flag day, so
I'll continue doing so and I'll only move it to unstable if the release
team approve it.
regards,
guillem
Reply to: