[gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.
And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for it so no need to
complain about list-only notices. =P

I'd like to have a few days in stable before the snapshot for 2004.3 is
taken.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Stuart Bouyer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 679 bytes --]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:25:48 -0700
Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@gentoo.org> wrote:

> If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before
> xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 can be marked stable on all archs, let me know
> within 24 hours. I plan to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would
> like other archs to follow shortly thereafter unless there's something
> I don't know about. And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for
> it so no need to complain about list-only notices. =P
> 
> I'd like to have a few days in stable before the snapshot for 2004.3
> is taken.
> 

How about compatabiltiy with ATI drivers? That would be bugs
61574 (major) and 63924 (critiacal).

StuBear


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 14:47, Stuart Bouyer wrote:
> How about compatabiltiy with ATI drivers? That would be bugs
> 61574 (major) and 63924 (critiacal).

There's no point in pretending I can do anything about ATi's lack of
compatible binary drivers, as Mike said. Users with ATi cards can either
remain with 6.7.0 or use the open-source drivers. Nobody's forcing you
to upgrade.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Mike Frysinger]

On Monday 11 October 2004 05:47 pm, Stuart Bouyer wrote:
> How about compatabiltiy with ATI drivers? That would be bugs
> 61574 (major) and 63924 (critiacal).

considering it looks like a bug with ati drivers (which are closed source) how 
can you expect the xorg people to 'fix' it ?

if it's a bug with the ati-drivers ebuild, that shouldnt stop the xorg-x11 
people
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Daniel Goller]

does 6.8.0-r1 check for ati-drivers being installed, and issuing notice 
and then bail out? i think it should, or you wont be able to close the 
"6.8.0 broken" bugs fast enough,
Guess it is simpler to block on ati-drivers till ati-drivers are fixed.
But to push 6.8.0-r1 out for anyone to upgrade knowing it will cause 
chaos doesn't seem wise.

Mike Frysinger wrote:

>On Monday 11 October 2004 05:47 pm, Stuart Bouyer wrote:
>  
>
>>How about compatabiltiy with ATI drivers? That would be bugs
>>61574 (major) and 63924 (critiacal).
>>    
>>
>
>considering it looks like a bug with ati drivers (which are closed source) how 
>can you expect the xorg people to 'fix' it ?
>
>if it's a bug with the ati-drivers ebuild, that shouldnt stop the xorg-x11 
>people
>-mike
>
>--
>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
>  
>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:50, Daniel Goller wrote:
> does 6.8.0-r1 check for ati-drivers being installed, and issuing notice 
> and then bail out? i think it should, or you wont be able to close the 
> "6.8.0 broken" bugs fast enough,
> Guess it is simpler to block on ati-drivers till ati-drivers are fixed.
> But to push 6.8.0-r1 out for anyone to upgrade knowing it will cause 
> chaos doesn't seem wise.

How exactly would you like me to do this? I can't block below a specific
version, because I don't know whether the next one released will work. I
can't block all versions, because then they'll never be able to install
one that does work.

It should be ati-drivers's job to figure out whether ati-drivers is
broken, not someone else's.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Luke-Jr]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 739 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 9:52 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:50, Daniel Goller wrote:
> > Guess it is simpler to block on ati-drivers till ati-drivers are fixed.
> > But to push 6.8.0-r1 out for anyone to upgrade knowing it will cause
> > chaos doesn't seem wise.
>
> How exactly would you like me to do this? I can't block below a specific
> version, because I don't know whether the next one released will work. I
> can't block all versions, because then they'll never be able to install
> one that does work.
Any reason you can't block all versions and have the ati-drivers people modify 
the block to include a specific version once one works?
-- 
Luke-Jr
Developer, Utopios
http://utopios.org/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:58, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Monday 11 October 2004 9:52 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:50, Daniel Goller wrote:
> > > Guess it is simpler to block on ati-drivers till ati-drivers are fixed.
> > > But to push 6.8.0-r1 out for anyone to upgrade knowing it will cause
> > > chaos doesn't seem wise.
> >
> > How exactly would you like me to do this? I can't block below a specific
> > version, because I don't know whether the next one released will work. I
> > can't block all versions, because then they'll never be able to install
> > one that does work.
> Any reason you can't block all versions and have the ati-drivers people modify 
> the block to include a specific version once one works?

Think: Will that help people who have already emerged an ebuild that
blocks all versions? I'd need a revision bump to change it, which is a
complete waste.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Daniel Goller]

the block would help them see that they cant use 3.x.y unless it is 
given a all clear by xorg and ati-drivers teams
ie, dont waste people trying one with the other until it works, those 
who can try will anyway and those not capable to step out side the box 
will appreciate not fighting xorg 6.8.0-r1 until working ati-drivers 
exist, like luke-jr said, dont block a certain version or range, block 
it altogether

Donnie Berkholz wrote:

>On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:58, Luke-Jr wrote:
>  
>
>>On Monday 11 October 2004 9:52 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:50, Daniel Goller wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Guess it is simpler to block on ati-drivers till ati-drivers are fixed.
>>>>But to push 6.8.0-r1 out for anyone to upgrade knowing it will cause
>>>>chaos doesn't seem wise.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>How exactly would you like me to do this? I can't block below a specific
>>>version, because I don't know whether the next one released will work. I
>>>can't block all versions, because then they'll never be able to install
>>>one that does work.
>>>      
>>>
>>Any reason you can't block all versions and have the ati-drivers people modify 
>>the block to include a specific version once one works?
>>    
>>
>
>Think: Will that help people who have already emerged an ebuild that
>blocks all versions? I'd need a revision bump to change it, which is a
>complete waste.
>  
>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Mike Williams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 841 bytes --]

On Tuesday 12 October 2004 04:43, Daniel Goller wrote:
> the block would help them see that they cant use 3.x.y unless it is
> given a all clear by xorg and ati-drivers teams
> ie, dont waste people trying one with the other until it works, those
> who can try will anyway and those not capable to step out side the box
> will appreciate not fighting xorg 6.8.0-r1 until working ati-drivers
> exist, like luke-jr said, dont block a certain version or range, block
> it altogether

As a non-ATI user I would be quiet unhappy to see a version bump of such a 
large package just to let ATI users use ATIs own drivers.
Wouldn't it be better to block xorg 6.8 from the ati-driver side? If a 6.7 
release remains in stable they'd continue to work properly, and the rest of 
us would get the shiney new version.

-- 
Mike Williams

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Lars Weiler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 818 bytes --]

* Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@gentoo.org> [04/10/11 13:25 -0700]:
> If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
> can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
> to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
> follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.

X.org-6.8.0 is a pain on ppc.

Our current main issues:
- freezes when a GLX-application starts on Rage128 (tested
  on several systems)
- keyboard handling has changed (you can't switch back to a
  console)
- various weird colour-handling with Radeon-cards, esp. on
  the PowerBook.

In our meeting at September 30 we said, that we won't switch
to the newer version.  We are waiting for another release
which hopefully will resolve the problems.

Regards, Lars

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 14:53, Lars Weiler wrote:
> Our current main issues:
> - freezes when a GLX-application starts on Rage128 (tested
>   on several systems)

OK, I see this at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65625 and
upstream at http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1513.

> - keyboard handling has changed (you can't switch back to a
>   console)

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63795. This may be as simple as a
keymap problem. Just diffing changes in keymaps from 6.7 to 6.8 could
show the problem.

> - various weird colour-handling with Radeon-cards, esp. on
>   the PowerBook.

Where and what are the bugs for the last issue? Gentoo or
freedesktop.org? http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1184
and http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=563 were what I saw
on a brief search.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Lars Weiler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1148 bytes --]

* Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@gentoo.org> [04/10/11 14:10 -0700]:
> OK, I see this at http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65625 and
> upstream at http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1513.

Correct.

> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63795. This may be as simple as a
> keymap problem. Just diffing changes in keymaps from 6.7 to 6.8 could
> show the problem.

I just found a quickpkg of my 6.7.0-installation :-)  I'll
go in research and comparision tomorrow.

In the thread
http://freedesktop.org/pipermail/xorg/2004-September/003473.html
the Mac-Problem is also mentioned.  I already tried the
resolution in RedHat's bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=132186
-- without luck.

> > - various weird colour-handling with Radeon-cards, esp. on
> >   the PowerBook.
> 
> Where and what are the bugs for the last issue? Gentoo or
> freedesktop.org? http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1184
> and http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=563 were what I saw
> on a brief search.

I saw it on lu_zero's PowerBook.  He should tell more about
it.

Regards, Lars

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 513 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 23:10, Donnie Berkholz wrote:

> > - various weird colour-handling with Radeon-cards, esp. on
> >   the PowerBook.

I've got a similar issue with my amd64 system (in x86 mode) when running 
vmware for a second time. For some reason the colors get distorted 
(probably some gamma register gets misset as thing get "purple"-ish). 
When I switch consoles it works again. 

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Lars Weiler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 479 bytes --]

* Lars Weiler <pylon@gentoo.org> [04/10/11 23:53 +0200]:
> - keyboard handling has changed (you can't switch back to a
>   console)

Using "pc104" or "pc105" instead of "macintosh" in the
XkbModel configline, resolved this issue.  Something is
wrong with the macintosh-drivers, but they are not needed
any more, as the Macs produce more or less proper
PC-keycodes.

I already changed Xautoconfig, the ppc-xorg.conf-creation-
tool to use the other keyboard-layout.

Regards, Lars

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Luke-Jr]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 711 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 8:25 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
> can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
> to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
> follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.
> And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for it so no need to
> complain about list-only notices. =P
Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it is a 
security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable (or even 
masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable.
-- 
Luke-Jr
Developer, Utopios
http://utopios.org/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:21, Luke-Jr wrote:
> Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it is a 
> security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable (or even 
> masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable.

Try reading the ChangeLog (grep -i security) before talking.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Luke-Jr]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 915 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 9:27 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:21, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it is a
> > security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable (or even
> > masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable.
>
> Try reading the ChangeLog (grep -i security) before talking.

So you are implying that 6.8.0-r1 is the same as 6.8.1 or something else?
I see info in the ChangeLog suggesting it might have the security fixes 
merged, but according to Kito, there are PPC/OSX bugfixes w/ the DRI ATi 
drivers also:
> not sure if 6.8.1 will fix the bugs with the binary ATI drivers on ppc
> linux, but it has fixed the ATI bugs on my ppc darwin system FWIW.

Are *those* fixes also present? ChangeLog doesn't suggest either way on 
non-security bugfixes.
-- 
Luke-Jr
Developer, Utopios
http://utopios.org/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:39, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Monday 11 October 2004 9:27 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:21, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > > Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it is a
> > > security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable (or even
> > > masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable.
> >
> > Try reading the ChangeLog (grep -i security) before talking.
> 
> So you are implying that 6.8.0-r1 is the same as 6.8.1 or something else?
> I see info in the ChangeLog suggesting it might have the security fixes 
> merged, but according to Kito, there are PPC/OSX bugfixes w/ the DRI ATi 
> drivers also:
> > not sure if 6.8.1 will fix the bugs with the binary ATI drivers on ppc
> > linux, but it has fixed the ATI bugs on my ppc darwin system FWIW.
> 
> Are *those* fixes also present? ChangeLog doesn't suggest either way on 
> non-security bugfixes.

kito is confused, and I'm not sure where he/she got that idea. Don't
believe someone without any proof. There is absolutely nothing new in
6.8.1 over 6.8.0 other than the security patch. Go to www.x.org for
yourself and click on Latest Release -- look at the patch.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Christian Parpart]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 11:47 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:39, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > On Monday 11 October 2004 9:27 pm, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:21, Luke-Jr wrote:
> > > > Why isn't anyone getting 6.8.1 in the Portage tree? Seeing as how it
> > > > is a security/bugfix release, I would expect 6.8.0 to remain unstable
> > > > (or even masked) and 6.8.1 to be marked stable.
> > >
> > > Try reading the ChangeLog (grep -i security) before talking.
> >
> > So you are implying that 6.8.0-r1 is the same as 6.8.1 or something else?
> > I see info in the ChangeLog suggesting it might have the security fixes
> > merged, but according to Kito, there are PPC/OSX bugfixes w/ the DRI ATi
> >
> > drivers also:
> > > not sure if 6.8.1 will fix the bugs with the binary ATI drivers on ppc
> > > linux, but it has fixed the ATI bugs on my ppc darwin system FWIW.
> >
> > Are *those* fixes also present? ChangeLog doesn't suggest either way on
> > non-security bugfixes.
>
> kito is confused, and I'm not sure where he/she got that idea. Don't
> believe someone without any proof. There is absolutely nothing new in
> 6.8.1 over 6.8.0 other than the security patch. Go to www.x.org for
> yourself and click on Latest Release -- look at the patch.

so why not giving it a proper release number? 6.8.1?
as it technically equals (+patches) to the upstream 6.8.1 release?

regards,
Christian Parpart.

-- 
Netiquette: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt
 11:00:00 up 48 days, 22:39,  1 user,  load average: 0.18, 0.19, 0.13

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Sebastian Bergmann]

Christian Parpart wrote:
> so why not giving it a proper release number? 6.8.1?
> as it technically equals (+patches) to the upstream 6.8.1 release?

 One advantage of 6.8.0-r1 (which equals 6.8.1) is that it saves
 bandwidth as the tarballs from 6.8.0 can be re-used.

-- 
Sebastian Bergmann                      http://www.sebastian-bergmann.de/
GnuPG Key: 0xB85B5D69 / 27A7 2B14 09E4 98CD 6277 0E5B 6867 C514 B85B 5D69


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 686 bytes --]

On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 12:01 +0200, Sebastian Bergmann wrote:
> Christian Parpart wrote:
> > so why not giving it a proper release number? 6.8.1?
> > as it technically equals (+patches) to the upstream 6.8.1 release?
> 
>  One advantage of 6.8.0-r1 (which equals 6.8.1) is that it saves
>  bandwidth as the tarballs from 6.8.0 can be re-used.

Another advantage is that upstream took forever releasing the tarballs,
but the patch for the problem was ready right away. I didn't want Gentoo
to be insecure any longer than it had to be, so I used the patch. But we
are using the 6.8.0 tarballs, and that's why the ebuild is versioned
6.8.0.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[neuron]

I and quite a lot of other people noticed a massive slowdown when 
switching to xorg, I gave up trying to track down the reason for this 
slowdown and my laptop (which was the only box on ~x86) is now testing 
ubuntu.

I noticed in the xorg thread on the message forum:

"I was having the same "really slow" loading problems experienced by 
others here using 6.8.0-r1, but that seems to be fixed with the latest 
masked release (6.8.0-r2). Now applications (X. KDE, etc) load as fast 
or faster then the 6.7.0-r2 release. I'm using the latest nvidia kernel 
release. Great job!"

So PLEASE dont mark 6.8.0-r1 stable, I had major issues with that one.

>If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
>can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
>to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
>follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.
>And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for it so no need to
>complain about list-only notices. =P
>
>I'd like to have a few days in stable before the snapshot for 2004.3 is
>taken.
>
>Thanks,
>Donnie
>  
>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 721 bytes --]

Hi,

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 22:25, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
> can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
> to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
> follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.
> And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for it so no need to
> complain about list-only notices. =P

It would be nice to have the patch for
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66051
(https://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1220) included in
xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1.

Sincerely,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1680 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 15:25, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> If there's anything I absolutely need to get in before xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1
> can be marked stable on all archs, let me know within 24 hours. I plan
> to mark x86 stable Tuesday night PDT and would like other archs to
> follow shortly thereafter unless there's something I don't know about.
> And yeah, I'll file you arch maintainers a bug for it so no need to
> complain about list-only notices. =P
> 
> I'd like to have a few days in stable before the snapshot for 2004.3 is
> taken.

I know I'm a little late in responding to this thread, but I just found
out that 6.8.0-r1 breaks xinerama/dual+ display support for anyone
running the Radeon chipset. And no, I'm not using the ati-drivers
package because that doesn't work for me since I'm running an r100
version of the Radeon. I'm not sure how many xinerama users we have out
there, but this is quite annoying. I've already commented on two bugs
related to this.

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67485
http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1559

I'm curious, are there any Radeon users out there running Xinerama that
aren't having problems with this version?

I've also noticed some quirkiness with the Radeon on my laptop. Now,
whenever I close the lid for my laptop, X won't come back up when I open
it back up. I have to go to a virtual terminal, then go back to the X
term and it'll show back up.
-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure

---
GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Stefan Schweizer]

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:53:42 -0500, Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'm curious, are there any Radeon users out there running Xinerama that
> aren't having problems with this version?

I have an Ati Radeon Mobility M6 here:
0000:01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon
Mobility M6 LY
According to dri.sf.net its like a r100.


Clone mode works out-of-the-box. But I never got xinerama working. If
you could point me to some howtos I would like to test if it works for
me.

Stefan Schweizer (genstef)

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 395 bytes --]

Hi,

On Sat, 2004-10-16 at 10:32, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Clone mode works out-of-the-box. But I never got xinerama working. If
> you could point me to some howtos I would like to test if it works for
> me.

HOWTOs? You can take a peak at my xorg.conf ->
http://dev.gentoo.org/~brix/files/xorg.conf-6.8.0

Sincerely,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Duncan]

Lance Albertson posted <1097902422.1755.6.camel@mirage>, excerpted below, 
on Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:53:42 -0500:

> I know I'm a little late in responding to this thread, but I just found
> out that 6.8.0-r1 breaks xinerama/dual+ display support for anyone running
> the Radeon chipset.
> 
> I'm curious, are there any Radeon users out there running Xinerama that
> aren't having problems with this version?

I'm running it here, with a Radeon 9200SE AGP dual output card, no
problems.  That's using the libreware drivers, and dual monitors, both
running 2048x1536, oriented one above the other for a 2048x3072 virtual
desktop.

Further, I've run both the standard dual adaptor/monitor/screen xorg.conf
(my default setup), and tried the new "MergedFB" mode as well.  I ended up
going back to standard Xinerama mode however, because MergedFB doesn't
handle a larger than 2048x2048 in 3D accelerated mode anyway, and while it
does handle a large enough 2D mode, the inflexibility of having a single
unified resolution list as opposed to being able to handle each screen
resolution separately, coupled with not being able to do 3D anyway due to
my chosen resolutions, meant the standard Xinerama mode was the better
solution for me.

OTOH, I haven't recently tried running with two separate video cards
entirely.  I had tried back with kernel 2.4/XFree, and couldn't get that
to work, as it'd never seem to initialize the second card correctly, altho
I know what it's like working, as I had it working with an NVidia dual
output card and their proprietaryware drivers, using an old 4MB S3 Virge
PCI as the second card driving the third monitor.  Just couldn't get the
libreware Radeon drivers to do it, tho.  Anyway, maybe two physical cards
was working with kernel 2.6 and xorg, and isn't now, as I haven't tried
two physical cards, only two outputs on the same card, which as I said,
works, here.

It also may be that I'm running AMD64 and yes it does work on that, but
maybe it doesn't on legacy 32-bit x86, or whatever other arch you may be
using.  (Of course, another variable is that I'm running gcc-3.4, which is
stable on amd64.  Maybe it works with gcc-3.4, but not with 3.3 or
whatever.  And.. yes I DID verify I'm running xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1, so we're
talking about the same thing there.)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
Benjamin Franklin



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 467 bytes --]

On Monday 11 October 2004 22:25, Donnie Berkholz wrote:

Btw.: Why the "glx" use flag, and not reusing the already existing and widely 
used "opengl" flag? Even unexperienced users may have an idea about opengl, 
but not glx. The "xfs" flag is bad chosen, since it is already used for 
sys-fs/xfs and everything else than self-describing (e.g. "font-server" would 
be a better one). The descriptions in profiles/use.local.desc are missing, 
too.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 636 bytes --]

On Sat, 2004-10-16 at 21:22 +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> Btw.: Why the "glx" use flag, and not reusing the already existing and widely 
> used "opengl" flag? Even unexperienced users may have an idea about opengl, 
> but not glx. The "xfs" flag is bad chosen, since it is already used for 
> sys-fs/xfs and everything else than self-describing (e.g. "font-server" would 
> be a better one). The descriptions in profiles/use.local.desc are missing, 
> too.

A lot of people are having trouble figuring out that 6.8.0-r2 is in
package.mask, with a line saying it's in development. That's all I'm
going to say on the subject.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 417 bytes --]

On Sunday 17 October 2004 05:25, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> A lot of people are having trouble figuring out that 6.8.0-r2 is in
> package.mask, with a line saying it's in development. That's all I'm
> going to say on the subject.

Oh, I did not notice that and still use 6.7. Just saw a thread in the german 
part of forums.g.o. Maybe Portage should print a warning, when someone 
unmasks locally.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]