On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 07:34:48PM -0500, Jason Lunz wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 12:59AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Right, and failure to regress on those chipsets is good enough for me. > > > > Any takers? > > I have one of these new Dells at home running sarge/sid with an i910 > (915? 9xx anyway) chipset, and I use a Dell at work with i865. I also > have access at work to another type of dell workstation with a third > type of intel chipset, iirc. So I can test 2, maybe 3 chipsets, and am > willing to help develop as well. > > I have a middling amount of debian packaging experience and plenty of > build maintenance experience, so I think I can take this on. I'll get > started by reading HACKING.txt and getting things building this weekend > most likely. Well, essentially, a patch would need to be prepped that resembled debian/patches/000_stolen_from_xorg_nv_driver.diff (in the Debian xfree86 source package), but updated the i810 driver directory instead. The bad news is that no more updates to xfree86 for sarge are planned. A case can of course be made for this hardware support, but at this point I'd need to involve the release management team. > What's the word on this licensing issue? I'm uncertain from reading all > the emails in this bug which codebases might or might not be tainted. David Martínez Moreno appears to have addressed this issue. If you get your patches from freedesktop.org CVS, it shouldn't be a problem. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | Ab abusu ad usum non valet branden@debian.org | consequentia. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature