OoO Pendant le temps de midi du mardi 13 mai 2008, vers 12:20, Michel Dänzer <daenzer@debian.org> disait: >> > I think it's fine for experimental, as long as the packager is aware >> > that it'll need quite some work to keep all the bits together, not just >> > the initial packaging. >> > I don't expect things to settle down this year, FWIW. >> >> I have packaged drm-snapshot which creates libdrm2, libdrm2-dev, >> libdrm2-dbg and nouveau-kernel-source. > If you're going through the trouble of reviving DRM snapshot packages, > please don't make them nouveau specific. DRM snapshots are useful for > other drivers as well. Hi Michel! My attempt to package drm-snapshot is nouveau specific only for kernel part. In fact, it would be easy to create XXXX-drm-kernel-source for each available drm driver. Would it be worth the effort? Moreover, I think that nouveau is just too difficult for me to package now. It seems that I wasn't able to identify the correct trees to use since my libdrm is not compatible with nouveau dri driver (which is really odd). Is it still worth packaging drm snapshot? I don't feel really motivated maintaining snapshot of DRM and not using it. :) >> Maybe, I should rename binary package to state that they should be used >> only with nouveau. I mean, if someone installs libdrm2 from >> experimental, it will break every X video driver, except nouveau. > Why is that? Because ABI incompatibility is not versioned yet. The shipped library is still named "libdrm.2.3.0.so" while it is not compatible with it. Therefore, this should break any xserver-xorg-video-*. This is pure assumption, though. -- BOFH excuse #39: terrorist activities
Attachment:
pgpa0Jg0T1Xzm.pgp
Description: PGP signature