below is a sample how other lists do handle
list submissions from non subscribers.
on a second place i know that the adminstrators
eased their job by setting a maximum hold time
after which the mail will be passed trough
unless an admin has canceled its delivery.
I would further like to know if
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 04:05:57AM +0200, Smitty wrote:
>> > >>>Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on
>> > >dri-devel? >>Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by
>> > >non-subscribers>>for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the
>> > >non-subscribed emails,>>so
Title: ±×µ¿¾È Àß Áö³»¼Ì´ÂÁö¿ä
±×µ¿¾È Àß Áö³»¼Ì´ÂÁö¿ä?
ÇöÀçÀÇ »îÀ» ȹ±âÀûÀ¸·Î º¯ÈÇϽðíÀÚ ÇÏ´Â ºÐ¸¸ ÀоîÁÖ½Ã°í µ¿ÂüÇÏ¿© Áֽñ⸦ ¹Ù¶ø´Ï´Ù. ÇöÀçÀÇ »î¿¡ ¸¸Á·ÇϽô ºÐ²² Á¤¸» ¹Ì¾ÈÇÕ´Ï´Ù.
2003³â! ÇÑÇØ°¡ ½ÃÀÛµÇ°í ¸ðµÎµé »õ·Î¿î °¢¿À·Î »îÀ» ¼³°èÇÏ°í ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.
ÇÑÇظ¦ ¸¶¹«¸®ÇÏ¸é¼ º¸¶÷µµ
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, Ian Romanick wrote:
> Leif Delgass wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, David Dawes wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >
> >>There are some more serious things holding up 4.3, including the issue
> >>that Leif mentioned here a couple of days ago. I haven't seen anyone
> >>comment on h
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 01:51:57AM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 23:56, Philip Brown wrote:
> > how is "only user joebrown can read and write /dev/dri/card0" any less
> > effective when there are multiple users on the box ??
>
> As well as the unix permissions DRI is also playing
Michel Dänzer wrote:
On Fre, 2003-02-14 at 16:03, Alan Cox wrote:
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:37, Michel Dänzer wrote:
That DRM is pretty old, is the 3D driver from the same date? Someone
said on an XFree86 list that the flightgear lockups went away for him
with XFree86 4.3.0rc1.
My lockup with
> > >>>Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on
> > >dri-devel? >>Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by
> > >non-subscribers>>for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the
> > >non-subscribed emails,>>so that everyone else could avoid them...
> > >
> > >That woul
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:37:31 -0500, David Dawes wrote:
> I meant to add that it'd be good if something along the lines of Michel
> Dnzer's work to allow DRI to be reinitialised at VT switch was added in
> after 4.3. I'm curious why it didn't made it into the DRI trunk already.
Michel's is goo
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:34:45 -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> > Smitty wrote:
> > >Hi Rich
> > >
> > >
> > >>>Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on dri-devel?
> > >>>Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by non-subscrib
Certainly can't see any immediate problem David.
We can always cut a 4.3.1 if issues are found anyway.
Alan.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:17:16 -0500, David Dawes wrote:
> Egbert and I have been looking into the issues that are preventing a second
> X server to be started for i810/830M platforms w
This patch looks good to me Leif.
Alan.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 06:24:50 -0500, Leif Delgass wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, David Dawes wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > There are some more serious things holding up 4.3, including the issue
> > that Leif mentioned here a couple of days ago. I haven't see
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:34:45 -0700, Brian Paul wrote:
> Smitty wrote:
> >Hi Rich
> >
> >
> >>>Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on dri-devel?
> >>>Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by non-subscribers
> >>>for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the non
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 23:56, Philip Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:23:07PM -0700, John Bartoszewski wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 10:14:21PM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> > > Also keep in mind that access to the DRI can be controlled via ownership
> > > and permissions of the /dev/d
Leif Delgass wrote:
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, David Dawes wrote:
[snip]
There are some more serious things holding up 4.3, including the issue
that Leif mentioned here a couple of days ago. I haven't seen anyone
comment on his proposed solution for that one either...
David
I was wondering abou
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:23:07PM -0700, John Bartoszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 10:14:21PM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> > Also keep in mind that access to the DRI can be controlled via ownership
> > and permissions of the /dev/dri/cardX devices.
>
> On a private machine this is metho
On Fri, 14 Feb 2003, David Dawes wrote:
[snip]
> There are some more serious things holding up 4.3, including the issue
> that Leif mentioned here a couple of days ago. I haven't seen anyone
> comment on his proposed solution for that one either...
>
> David
I was wondering about that myself.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 10:14:21PM +0100, Michel D?nzer wrote:
> Also keep in mind that access to the DRI can be controlled via ownership
> and permissions of the /dev/dri/cardX devices.
On a private machine this is method is effective.
On a public machine, such as a University lab, where all user
Smitty wrote:
Hi Rich
Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on dri-devel?
Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by non-subscribers
for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the non-subscribed emails,
so that everyone else could avoid them...
That would be great
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:35:48PM -0600, D. Hageman wrote:
>Since the changes touch the general DRM code I would say hold off on
>making the changes. I think it might be a good idea to push the 4.3.0 out
>the door and let the vendors pick up that for release since quite a few
>improvements alr
Hi Rich
> > Is there anything that can be done to cut down the spam on dri-devel?
> > Several other mailing lists I'm on hold submissions by non-subscribers
> > for approval. I'd even be willing to sort the non-subscribed emails,
> > so that everyone else could avoid them...
That would be great,
Since the changes touch the general DRM code I would say hold off on
making the changes. I think it might be a good idea to push the 4.3.0 out
the door and let the vendors pick up that for release since quite a few
improvements already exist in the code base. At that point we can focus
on a
I meant to add that it'd be good if something along the lines of Michel
Dänzer's work to allow DRI to be reinitialised at VT switch was added in
after 4.3. I'm curious why it didn't made it into the DRI trunk already.
David
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:17:16PM -0500, David Dawes wrote:
>Egbert and
Egbert and I have been looking into the issues that are preventing a second
X server to be started for i810/830M platforms when DRI is enabled. Several
issues were found:
1. The i810 support doesn't unbind/release the agpgart module when VT
switching away, and this prevents a second X serv
On Fre, 2003-02-14 at 17:42, John Bartoszewski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 08:19:35PM -0500, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, John Bartoszewski wrote:
> >
> > Heard comments from whom? And what specific security problems?
> > What source code files are these problems in? Or
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 11:43:17AM +0100, Martin Spott wrote:
> I'm glad to see that FlightGear is not the only reliable test case for the
> Radeon X server lockup 'feature' ;-))
It's probably different problem, because it happen on both R100 and R200. With
old DRI drivers and driver from XFree86
Leif Delgass wrote:
I've opened a new mach64 branch (mach64-0-0-6-branch), which has now been
updated from the current DRI trunk with X 4.2.99.2 and Mesa 5.x. I've
updated the mach64 driver to Mesa 5 based on the changes to the Rage 128
driver. Testing hasn't shown any problems so far.
I haven'
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 03:03:06 +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:37, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > That DRM is pretty old, is the 3D driver from the same date? Someone
> > said on an XFree86 list that the flightgear lockups went away for him
> > with XFree86 4.3.0rc1.
>
> My lockup wi
On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 04:51:24PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 14:52, Martin Spott wrote:
> > > My lockup with flightgear on the 9000 with 4.2.99 based tree and a recent
> > > DRM module.
> >
> > Where did you take the DRM sources from ? I usually take the source for the
> > DR
confirm 990080
---
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte
are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE
Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues.
http://ads.sourceforge
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 14:52, Martin Spott wrote:
> > My lockup with flightgear on the 9000 with 4.2.99 based tree and a recent
> > DRM module.
>
> Where did you take the DRM sources from ? I usually take the source for the
> DRM module from the same DRI CVS tree I use to build the whole DRI thing
[... Alan Cox wrote ...]
> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:37, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> That DRM is pretty old, is the 3D driver from the same date? Someone
>> said on an XFree86 list that the flightgear lockups went away for him
>> with XFree86 4.3.0rc1.
> My lockup with flightgear on the 9000 with 4.2.
On Fre, 2003-02-14 at 16:03, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:37, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > That DRM is pretty old, is the 3D driver from the same date? Someone
> > said on an XFree86 list that the flightgear lockups went away for him
> > with XFree86 4.3.0rc1.
>
> My lockup with flightge
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 13:37, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> That DRM is pretty old, is the 3D driver from the same date? Someone
> said on an XFree86 list that the flightgear lockups went away for him
> with XFree86 4.3.0rc1.
My lockup with flightgear on the 9000 with 4.2.99 based tree and a recent
DRM
On Fre, 2003-02-14 at 11:38, Pedro Vasconcelos wrote:
>
> I've sucessfully installed radeon DRI binary snapshot from dri.sourceforge.net
> on my system. 3D acceleration works well, with the exception of an irritating
> problem: sometimes the system locks with some GL applications if I move or
>
On Fri, 2003-02-14 at 10:38, Pedro Vasconcelos wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've sucessfully installed radeon DRI binary snapshot from dri.sourceforge.net on my
>system. 3D acceleration works well, with the exception of an irritating problem:
>sometimes the system locks with some GL applications if I mov
> I wrote that MindRover crashes X with Radeon VE and DRI. Last days I asked few
> people on irc to test MindRover-demo with their Radeons (TCL and no-TCL, DRI
> from current CVS and older). All of them got X locked. [...]
I'm glad to see that FlightGear is not the only reliable test case for the
Hello,
I've sucessfully installed radeon DRI binary snapshot from dri.sourceforge.net on my
system. 3D acceleration works well, with the exception of an irritating problem:
sometimes the system locks with some GL applications if I move or resize the window or
(sometimes) on exiting the applica
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Alexander Stohr wrote:
>> > development for the Linux platform has not stopped,
>> > surely not, it is just that there were no releases
>> > in the last two months or so. i have to admit that
>> > there were some problems as for any driver out there,
>> > but none was so funda
Hello:
Simon Cahuk wrote,
> Hi! I have FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE. I can't compile DRI CVS. I got this
> error:
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lXThrStub
> *** Error code 1
I ran into the same thing just now, fixed it with a symlink:
root# ln -s /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/libXThrStub.so.6 \
/usr/X11R6/lib
Could someone please explain the difference between
DRM_IOCTL_ADD_CTX
vs
DRM_IOCTL_NEW_CTX
Then again, maybe DRM_IOCTL_NEW_CTX is more like DRM_IOCTL_SWITCH_CTX,
reguardless of whether the name itself sounds more like ADD_CTX?
---
This S
Hi! I have FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE. I can't compile DRI CVS. I got this
error:
making all in lib/GL/GL...
rm -f libGL.so.1.2~
+ cd .
+ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../../../exports/lib cc -o ./libGL.so.1.2~ -shared
-rpath /usr
/X11R6/lib -Wl,-soname,libGL.so.1 ../../../lib/GL/glx/clientattrib.o
../../../li
b/GL/g
41 matches
Mail list logo
