On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 13:02:05 +0200, Christoph Egger wrote: > Hi all! > > Seems I was a bit confused. The meat of the patch is still necessary > for libdrm2 to work on kfreebsd (as seen on the upstream bug which is > still open as well). All "we" need is [0] from that bug though. Anyone > familiar with upstream an idea on how this bug can be fixed there? The > bugreport is from february and I don't see any negative feedback / > rejects there but also no action. > Meh. Why does the bug report say libkms where it's really a libdrm patch? libkms is irrelevant, really. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature