On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 22:26, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 09:57:48PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> ...
> > > I just wanted to ask if there's a reason that the 4.2.0 pre1v1 debs
> > > weren't compiled against the updated 1.2.0 kernel modules?
> >
> > It's not a matter of compil
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 01:26:01PM -0700, Michael Cardenas wrote:
> Are you saying that the dri modules in xfree86 need to be compiled
> against the headers of the running kernel?
No, the DRI modules in XFree86 need to be *written* against the new
version of the interface. This is not a compliati
On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 09:57:48PM +0200, Michel D?nzer wrote:
...
> > I just wanted to ask if there's a reason that the 4.2.0 pre1v1 debs
> > weren't compiled against the updated 1.2.0 kernel modules?
>
> It's not a matter of compiling against the kernel modules, on the
> contrary the source for
On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 19:00, Michael Cardenas wrote:
>
> We're trying to use your pre1v1 debs here at lindows, and our qa dept
> found that the intel i810 card is not accelerated for 3d.
>
> I found in /var/log/XFree86.0.log that the i810 X module wanted
> version 1.2.0 of the i810 kernel modul
Hello everyone.
We're trying to use your pre1v1 debs here at lindows, and our qa dept
found that the intel i810 card is not accelerated for 3d.
I found in /var/log/XFree86.0.log that the i810 X module wanted
version 1.2.0 of the i810 kernel module, and I found the kernel patch
on xfree86.org fo
5 matches
Mail list logo