Re: [Dri-devel] libdrm.a Bugs
On Fri, Apr 20, 2001 at 03:10:37PM -0700, Sottek, Matthew J wrote: > Oh, > That explains some things. I am not using your cvs as it > would be more trouble than it is worth. The XvMC portions > are very fresh in the XFree tree and I don't think you've > merged them in, so I am using the XFree cvs. However, I > also need the latest kernels so my drm sources are from > kernel 2.4.3 which apparently is pretty behind for drm > sources. I guess I should probably stay with the drm and > libdrm from the XFree tree, but since your patches don't > always make it over there for a while we end up with > periods of time where the drm's from XFree don't work on > the latest kernels, and probably your drm's don't work with > the latest XFree. > > It would be nice if there was a published time when you > get your sources merged into XFree and it happened on a > more frequent basis than just right before an XFree release. > > XFree at MM/DD/ HH:mm:ss UTC == DRI at the same time. > > then make sure the merges happen at least monthly so that > there isn't so much divergence. Now that XFree has a > stable and devel branch there shouldn't be much of an issue > getting your head (stable) branch merged on a regular > schedule. > > In fact since XFree has a devel branch I don't really see > why your head branch shouldn't _BE_ the XFree devel branch. > DRI cvs could just be the various dri development branches, > but when something is stable it is merged into XFree cvs > and dri users who are not debugging or developing should > just be on the XFree devel branch. > Having said this Matthew - the DRI CVS trunk matches 4.0.99.2 currently. At each devel snapshot release it is merged into the DRI CVS. We try and do this as time permits, so it may get delayed sometimes, but that's what we aim for anyway. And from what I can see in upcoming 4.0.99.3 snapshot it includes only one XvMC protocol bug fix so far. Alan. ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
RE: [Dri-devel] libdrm.a Bugs
Oh, That explains some things. I am not using your cvs as it would be more trouble than it is worth. The XvMC portions are very fresh in the XFree tree and I don't think you've merged them in, so I am using the XFree cvs. However, I also need the latest kernels so my drm sources are from kernel 2.4.3 which apparently is pretty behind for drm sources. I guess I should probably stay with the drm and libdrm from the XFree tree, but since your patches don't always make it over there for a while we end up with periods of time where the drm's from XFree don't work on the latest kernels, and probably your drm's don't work with the latest XFree. It would be nice if there was a published time when you get your sources merged into XFree and it happened on a more frequent basis than just right before an XFree release. XFree at MM/DD/ HH:mm:ss UTC == DRI at the same time. then make sure the merges happen at least monthly so that there isn't so much divergence. Now that XFree has a stable and devel branch there shouldn't be much of an issue getting your head (stable) branch merged on a regular schedule. In fact since XFree has a devel branch I don't really see why your head branch shouldn't _BE_ the XFree devel branch. DRI cvs could just be the various dri development branches, but when something is stable it is merged into XFree cvs and dri users who are not debugging or developing should just be on the XFree devel branch. -Original Message- From: Jeff Hartmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 20, 2001 8:38 AM To: Sottek, Matthew J Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Dri-devel] libdrm.a Bugs Sottek, Matthew J wrote: > All, > I'm doing a direct rendered HWMC (XvMC protocol) driver for the i81x, I am > compiling the drm Libs outside of the X server and have run into a problem. > The > current Linux kernel is allocating minor numbers for the device dynamically, > but > the drm Libs don't seem to have caught up with this idea. Here is the broken > scenario: Actually we moved away from using dynamic minor numbers in cvs recently to make the drm more portable. Are you using a recent version of our cvs tree? Or is this based on 4.0.x? The current cvs should use major 226, minor 0 for the first card I believe. -Jeff ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [Dri-devel] libdrm.a Bugs
Sottek, Matthew J wrote: > All, > I'm doing a direct rendered HWMC (XvMC protocol) driver for the i81x, I am > compiling the drm Libs outside of the X server and have run into a problem. > The > current Linux kernel is allocating minor numbers for the device dynamically, > but > the drm Libs don't seem to have caught up with this idea. Here is the broken > scenario: Actually we moved away from using dynamic minor numbers in cvs recently to make the drm more portable. Are you using a recent version of our cvs tree? Or is this based on 4.0.x? The current cvs should use major 226, minor 0 for the first card I believe. -Jeff ___ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
