On Wed, Nov 29, 2006 at 07:50:51PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>
> The nouveau project is deobfuscating the code as they go. Even if their DRI
> work isn't ready for Lenny, we'll definitely be pulling their deobfuscated
> code.
Put aside what we do for Lenny, is there any technical problem in ter
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 09:23:20AM +0200, Brice Goglin wrote:
> tags 412069 +wontfix
> thank you
>
>
>
> Trying to summarize:
>
> [...]
>
> So I would personally not enable any of these options by
> default (hence tagging as wontfix). It is already very late
> in the release cycle, changing th
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 06:25:51PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 10:26:09AM +0100, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:02:02PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> > >
> > > I haven't decided if enabling composite b
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 06:26:45PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 11:33:12AM +0100, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 10:55:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > > > My point is that if we don't figure that out
On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 10:55:55AM +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > My point is that if we don't figure that out satisfactorily in time, we
> > could
> > just enable the Composite extension, which sounds fairly safe, and seems to
> > be
> > enough for Intel cards. And Intel happens to be the card
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:02:02PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>
> I haven't decided if enabling composite by default is a wise move yet. No
> one in Debian has done a real analysis as to what the downsides of such a
> decision are.
>
> While compiz and beryl may be very sexy, I don't want to bre
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 12:39:45PM +0100, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 11:44 +0100, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> > My intel card can do without either XAANoOffscreenPixmaps or
> > AddARGBGLXVisuals.
> > No difference can be found on first sight (and I te
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:25:56PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
>
> Oh, not really. Screw nVidia. Beryl is only for faithful followers of the
> one true Intel card brand. :-)
>
> So which lines are we going to add, if any? I can test which lines can
> Intel do without, but not till monday.
My
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 11:44:36AM +0100, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 10:25:56PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> >
> > Oh, not really. Screw nVidia. Beryl is only for faithful followers of the
> > one true Intel card brand. :-)
> >
>
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 12:54:58PM +0100, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> > + Option "AddARGBGLXVisuals" "On"
> >
>
> I thought this option was nVidia specific.
According to the wiki [1], it is "optional if
Package: xserver-xorg
Severity: wishlist
Tags: patch
I know it's too late for Beryl to make it into etch, but can we at least ship
an xorg.conf that is frendly to Beryl ? With this patch, only installing
the beryl packages will be enough to get it working with no further setup
(provided that Open
Package: xserver-xorg
Severity: important
xserver-xorg/config/monitor/selection-method is never displayed anymore during
a "dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg" call. That makes it impossible to select
resolutions manualy.
I can see that db_get xserver-xorg/config/monitor/selection-method is run in
th
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 08:54:59PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Quoting "Robert Millan [ackstorm]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 09:13:37AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> >>
> >>> Any news on this? The patch works p
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 09:13:37AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
>
> > Any news on this? The patch works pretty well for me. Is etch going to
> > release
> > with 1.1, or with 1.0 ? If 1.0 is being released it better not be
> > unpatched..
>
> The patch is applied to xserver 1.1.1.
xserver 1.1
Hi!
Any news on this? The patch works pretty well for me. Is etch going to release
with 1.1, or with 1.0 ? If 1.0 is being released it better not be unpatched..
--
Robert Millan
ACK STORM, S.L. - http://www.ackstorm.es
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "un
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 11:58:57AM +0200, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > As for 1280x800, I noticed that it is now present, but I think turning the
> > multiselect into an open text template (perhaps even with an empty default)
> > might be a good idea.
>
>
> I don't think so as this would be very
severity 384285 grave
thanks
Given that doing something that is suggested by the template (selecting empty
list) renders postinst in an unusable state, from which killing it is the only
exit, I think this qualifies as RC.
Note, there's a red herring: after you select an empty list and the questio
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:34:47AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 10:51 +0200, Robert Millan [ackstorm] wrote:
> >
> > Please could you add "1280x800" to the list of valid resolutions? This is
> > my
> > monitor's optimal resol
Package: xserver-xorg
Severity: normal
In the resolution multiselect template, this message appears:
"Removing all of them is the same as removing none, since in both cases the X
server will attempt to use the highest possible resolution."
but it doesn't seem to be true anymore (selecting none r
Package: xserver-xorg
Severity: wishlist
Please could you add "1280x800" to the list of valid resolutions? This is my
monitor's optimal resolution.
Sidenote: This is getting awkward. I think it'd be a good idea to replace the
multiselect template with a "text" one that has the same defaults. T
tags 345958 patch
thanks
Hi!
This patch from Ubuntu worked for me.
--
Robert Millan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Departamento de Asistencia Técnica
Oficina central: (+34) 902 888 345
Asistencia técnica: (+34) 902 888 408
ACK STORM, S.L.
http://www.ackstorm.es
Este mensaje electrónico contiene informaci
21 matches
Mail list logo
