Bug#234025: xserver-xfree86: Same problem w/ radeon 9200 (it's fixed in XF86 4.4.0)
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 11:39:28AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 08:49:41AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 03:00:28PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > If someone will step up and responsibility for it, it might get in. But
> > > dumping patches that have problems and/or won't apply is not sufficient.
> >
> > Oh, come on, that was the early version, i later sent you a corrected
> > version, and you said you understood what was needed, and would make the
> > needed adaptation yourself. The patch was against 4.3.0-0pre1v4.
>
> Okay.
>
> Let's skip to the end of your mail:
Ok.
> > On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 01:07:14PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > My gripes with your patch are nothing I can't fix, so you don't need
> > > to send an updated one.
> > >
> > > Keep in mind, though, that the SDK/DDK package is a post-4.3.0-1
> > > issue.
> >
> > Well, this clearly gives to understand that you will apply the patch in
> > post 4.3.0-1, and that you don't need any further action from my part,
> > apart some proding. Anyway, the patch is here :
> >
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2003/debian-x-200311/msg00002.html
>
> I had forgotten this exchange, and the current state of the patch.
> Thanks for reminding me of it, and see below.
Yeah.
> > It is no patch, just a bit of stuff needed in the control file to
> > generate the sdk package (including description) and the needed change
> > in the debian/rules for generating it. The rest of the patch you
> > mentioned has already been checked in upstream, both with the 4.4 branhc
> > as in the 4.3 bugfix branch, and has thus been included in the current
> > package. The only thing needed is the one to enable it.
> >
> > So, if you still have critics on said patch i sent to you, and you said
> > you would include later, but didn't want to do before XFree86 entered
> > unstable, which i understand, but i already worked this patch over two
> > time, without any effect than it get lost, i have more usefull things to
> > do with my time than work for nothing.
>
> Well, if it had been filed as a wishlist bug, it would've been easier to
> keep track of.
Yeah, i should have done that. You didn't point it out to me in that
mail in november though, but i will not make this mistake a second time.
> This is one reason you find me banging the drum of "documented
> procedure". Things fall out of my brain, especially things that
> happened six months ago. If we have something better than a high-volume
> mailing list to store things in, it helps with recall.
That's why you should have applied the patch immediately :)
> > Now, if i have a guarantee than the new try will not just get ignored i
> > will have a look again.
>
> I'll take another look at it.
Like said, the patch is trivial, and should have no side effect. My time
allotment for XFree86 related stuff has strongly diminished since
november though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: