Sven Joachim (30/03/2010):
> Available at
> http://git.debian.org/?p=users/joachim-guest/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau.git.
>
> This one I consider suitable for merging into the pkg-xorg's
> repository. At least, it does not screw things up irreversibly like
> merging the "upstream"-ubuntu branch w
On 2010-03-28 19:57 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 19:25:43 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> The decision to put the snapshot-date file into the upstream-ubuntu
>> branch is not exactly stellar either, I would like to keep this and
>> other generated files out of the upstrea
On 2010-03-30 07:32 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2010-03-30 01:33 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>
>> Cyril Brulebois (30/03/2010):
>>
>>> I've already some patches on top of your current branch (like the
>>> dh_shlibdeps one), I'll wait for your answer to my previous mail
>>> about a possible
On 2010-03-30 00:08 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Sven Joachim (25/03/2010):
>> - We need something like Ubuntu's 01_include_snapshot_date patch to
>> ensure that NV_DRIVER_DATE is set to something meaningful when
>> building outside the Git repository. NV_DRIVER_DATE is only used to
>>
On 2010-03-30 01:33 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Cyril Brulebois (30/03/2010):
>
>> I've already some patches on top of your current branch (like the
>> dh_shlibdeps one), I'll wait for your answer to my previous mail
>> about a possible rebase of your branch before pushing your branch
>> and
On 2010-03-29 23:13 +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Sven Joachim (28/03/2010):
>> I put a warning into that repository's description, since I intend
>> to redo some of the work in a better way.
>
> I've just had a look, and the current set of patches in your
> debian-experimental branch seems qui
Hi again.
Cyril Brulebois (30/03/2010):
> Does picking build date sound OK, or do we want something really
> related to the last upstream commit? I can take care of it.
+
> ACK. We already do that for other drivers. I'll take care of it.
= stupid question.
Both are taken care of (although I'm no
Sven Joachim (25/03/2010):
> - We need something like Ubuntu's 01_include_snapshot_date patch to
> ensure that NV_DRIVER_DATE is set to something meaningful when
> building outside the Git repository. NV_DRIVER_DATE is only used to
> print the driver date into Xorg's log file, so setting it
Sven Joachim (25/03/2010):
> > I'd like to echo Julien's thanks. BTW: Do you plan to maintain
> > nouveau on a regular basis or is that just a one-time shot?
>
> Well, I have not quite made up my mind about it, which you can
> probably understand when I tell you that Wednesday was the first
> tim
Hello,
Sven Joachim (28/03/2010):
> I put a warning into that repository's description, since I intend
> to redo some of the work in a better way.
I've just had a look, and the current set of patches in your
debian-experimental branch seems quite okay. Do you still plan to
rework some stuff ther
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 20:37:27 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2010-03-28 19:57 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 19:25:43 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:17:00 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> The only remedy for that would be
On 2010-03-28 19:57 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 19:25:43 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:17:00 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> >
>> >> The only remedy for that would be if the Debian kernel team could pull
>> >> nouveau drm from 2.6.34 rather t
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 19:25:43 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:17:00 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >
> >> The only remedy for that would be if the Debian kernel team could pull
> >> nouveau drm from 2.6.34 rather than 2.6.33. They are probably not going
> >> to do that,
On 2010-03-28 16:36 +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:17:00 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> The only remedy for that would be if the Debian kernel team could pull
>> nouveau drm from 2.6.34 rather than 2.6.33. They are probably not going
>> to do that, but I'd have a good
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 16:17:00 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> The only remedy for that would be if the Debian kernel team could pull
> nouveau drm from 2.6.34 rather than 2.6.33. They are probably not going
> to do that, but I'd have a good argument for it. The 2.6.33 nouveau
> module needs non-
On 2010-03-24 09:20 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 22:19:20 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how to do the merge. While merging upstream-ubuntu into
>> upstream-experimental is a trivial fast-forward, and merging
>> upstream-experimental into debian-experimenta
On 2010-03-24 02:53 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> Sven Joachim (23/03/2010):
>> I have some good news, since (after fixing #568162) I indeed managed
>> to build a working package. At least X has been running for about
>> two hours which is a promising start. :-)
>
> I'd like to echo Julien's t
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 22:19:20 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> I'm not sure how to do the merge. While merging upstream-ubuntu into
> upstream-experimental is a trivial fast-forward, and merging
> upstream-experimental into debian-experimental is also a no-brainer,
> merging ubuntu into debian-exp
Hi,
Sven Joachim (23/03/2010):
> I have some good news, since (after fixing #568162) I indeed managed
> to build a working package. At least X has been running for about
> two hours which is a promising start. :-)
I'd like to echo Julien's thanks. BTW: Do you plan to maintain nouveau
on a regul
On 2010-03-23 14:14 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 14:02:19 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> I had just begun to tackle that task, using the ubuntu branch from
>> xserver-xorg-video-nouveau git as a starting point.
>>
> Oh, cool. Thanks for doing this.
I have some good news
Sven Joachim wrote:
> So? My attempt to build xserver-xorg-video-nouveau was shortcut here:
>
> ,
> | checking if DPMSExtension is defined... yes
> | checking for LIBDRM_NOUVEAU... configure: error: Package requirements
> (libdrm_nouveau) were not met:
> |
> | No package 'libdrm_nouveau' fo
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 14:02:19 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2010-03-23 13:51 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > No, it needs somebody who'd take care of packaging a suitable nouveau
> > X driver.
>
> I had just begun to tackle that task, using the ubuntu branch from
> xserver-xorg-video-nouvea
On 2010-03-23 13:51 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 13:30:03 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
>> block 568168 by 568162
>> thanks
>>
>> Now that the drm parts from 2.6.33 have been backported to the Debian
>> 2.6.32 kernel, packaging xserver-xorg-video-nouveau seems to be
>> de
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 13:30:03 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> block 568168 by 568162
> thanks
>
> Now that the drm parts from 2.6.33 have been backported to the Debian
> 2.6.32 kernel, packaging xserver-xorg-video-nouveau seems to be
> desirable, but that needs a fixed libdrm which includes the n
block 568168 by 568162
thanks
Now that the drm parts from 2.6.33 have been backported to the Debian
2.6.32 kernel, packaging xserver-xorg-video-nouveau seems to be
desirable, but that needs a fixed libdrm which includes the nouveau
parts.
Sven
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ.
25 matches
Mail list logo
