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

Re: X problem ibook 2.2

On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 10:58:42AM +0200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > > Oooops! I just remembered that agpgart and/or radeon that come with 2.4
> > > kernel is not recent enough for dri.
> >
> > Arg, how am i going to fix this kind of things if nobody fills a bug
> > report about it ?
> You seem to be following this list :-) So doesn BenH, BTW.

That is no excuse for a proper bug report. Such kind of things are much
easier to miss or later forget if they are not properly filled.
especially now that i am using the 2.4 benh tree, there should really be
no reason not to fill such a bug report.

Also, altough i read this list, i may do so with varying frequency,
depending on my own work load, and may be much more akin to miss stuff
if i come back to it after a week and see many hundreds of unread mails.

> Seriously: 2.4 kernel agp support not being sufficient for stock xfree86
> DRI (but for Michel Dänzer's DRI packages, if I recall right) has been
> mentioned many times before The 'bug' is on the side of the user here.

Yeah, apart that i was told by both Michel and Branden that building
separate drm modules is deprecated, and that the packages should be
built together with the kernel. The same should probably apply to
agpgart modules.

> What you _could_ do is write yet another FAQ explaining what 2.4 kernels

Thanks for volunteering my time, why you don't go ahead, and write such
a document so i could include it in the debian kernel package ? 

> are expected to do (support ancient hardware well, period), and which 2.6
> versions to try instead.

As there is no official debian 2.6 kernel yet (and probably wont be in
the near future if i have to loose time in writing FAQs and other such
stuff you want me to), and as debian-installer doesn't support 2.6
kernels anyway yet, the point is moot.

For your information, my current priorities are getting debian-installer
working on all supported powerpc hardware. We missed that with the
beta3, so let's make sure this is not the case for beta4. Then getting a
2.6 kernel out, hopefully beta4 will include support for them already. I
am also working on a ppc64 toolchain, so we can get ppc64 power3 and
power4 kernels, see Benjamins remark about abandoning ppc32 support for
those in the not so far future.


Sven Luther

Reply to: