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

Re: Packaging nouveau



OoO La  nuit ayant  déjà recouvert  d'encre ce jour  du dimanche  11 mai
2008, vers 23:02, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> disait:

> As I said in a previous message, libdrm changed ABI incompatibly between
> 2.3.0 and current master.  That means you MUST NOT provide libdrm2.

I  did not  mess with  library  soname, instead  I just  make a  package
libdrm2n instead and I have  modified shlibs to reflect the change. This
means  that I  still  ship  libdrm.2.3.0 (I  replace  and conflict)  but
packages  that build  using this  libdrm  will depends  on libdrm2n  (>>
2.3.0). Is it ok?

On another topic, I am now able  to compile mesa. That was not easy. ;-)
So, I  have a  mesa-nouveau source package  that builds the  same binary
packages    than   mesa    in   unstable.    I   need    to    work   on
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau now. And test the whole thing.

I discovered that xserver-xorg-core is  a reverse depends of libdrm2 and
therefore, I need  to recompile it. I suppose that  (if the packages hit
experimental one day) I will need to upload a binary only package.
-- 
# Okay, what on Earth is this one supposed to be used for?
        2.4.0 linux/drivers/char/cp437.uni

Attachment: pgpcEztLbWv_A.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: