On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:47 AM, Andy Whitcroft <a...@canonical.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 03:32:05PM -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Timo Aaltonen <tjaal...@cc.hut.fi> wrote: >> > On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Bryce Harrington wrote: >> > >> >> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:56:11PM +0000, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >> >>> We are therefore planning to upload a hybrid >> >>> 2.6.32 kernel containing the 2.6.33 drm backported. >> >> >> >> Btw, for bug report fiddling purposes, is there a reliable way to detect >> >> the drm version installed? The drm version does not show up in uname -a >> >> of course, and `dmesg|grep drm|grep 2\.6\.33` returns nothing (at least, >> >> on nouveau). >> >> >> >> (Basically I want a way to automatically distinguish between bug reports >> >> that were tested with the new 2.6.33 drm vs those that won't, so we can >> >> prioritize our attentions accordingly.) >> > >> > Isn't the kernel abi enough for that? -16 has the backport, anything >> > before that doesn't. >> >> Right but its still good to know a backport from which 2.6.33.y > > Fair point. Right now we have v2.6.33 straight. But I do see how we > might want some finer grain record of the version. I will look at where > we can expose that.
A printk perhaps? Luis -- Ubuntu-x mailing list Ubuntu-x@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-x