Re: What's the status on Xfree86 4.1.0?
- To: email@example.com
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: What's the status on Xfree86 4.1.0?
- From: Adam C Powell IV <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 18:20:22 -0400
- Message-id: <3B96A526.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <3B8533EF.EEA501B0@edaptivity.com> <E15ZxRF-0003JNemail@example.com> <3B853ACE.36AED688@edaptivity.com> <E15Zy6k-0003NRfirstname.lastname@example.org> <3B8B9851.email@example.com> <E15bjob-0004NXfirstname.lastname@example.org> <3B8BE037.email@example.com> <3B8D0E62.firstname.lastname@example.org> <20010829195804.E30877@deadbeast.net> <3B8E817A.email@example.com> <20010830160000.A2244@deadbeast.net> <E15cliPfirstname.lastname@example.org>
Phil Blundell wrote:
I'm sorry, I'm pretty swamped for the next three weeks. If I get some
time, I'll try it, but can't promise anything.
I was pretty sure that the module loader would be broken. I need an arm
hacker to go through the arm-specific patches in debian/held-patches an
re-merge them with 4.1.0.
Blast, yes, I forgot the module loader.
From a quick glance at the code, you want to apply
600_arm_module_loader_and_port_IO.diff. A lot of the elfloader.c hunks will
fail but I think they are no longer required. You also need at least the
xf86sym.c part of 600a.diff; again one hunk will fail and can be ignored.
Would someone like to try that out and see what happens? Adam, if you still
have your build tree around it should be quite easy to apply those patches and
rebuild just the affected parts.
I did notice, however, that -4 seemed to autobuild! Progress!
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!