From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5446 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2004 08:47:45 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 12 Oct 2004 08:47:45 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CHIJs-0007tg-R5 for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:47:44 +0000 Received: (qmail 19826 invoked by uid 89); 12 Oct 2004 08:47:44 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 20461 invoked from network); 12 Oct 2004 08:47:44 +0000 From: Mike Williams To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:47:34 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <1097526348.30232.6.camel@helen.science.oregonstate.edu> <1097532277.30232.49.camel@helen.science.oregonstate.edu> <416B52F2.8000702@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <416B52F2.8000702@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2129585.57Tsm9hTIC"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200410120947.41264.mike@gaima.co.uk> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] xorg-x11-6.8.0-r1 ready to go stable on all archs X-Archives-Salt: eae356b5-fd79-49a5-9280-896eb7538bfe X-Archives-Hash: 0d3b6ad26ed9b5474aede9a5a5e09066 --nextPart2129585.57Tsm9hTIC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline 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= =20 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= =20 release remains in stable they'd continue to work properly, and the rest of= =20 us would get the shiney new version. =2D-=20 Mike Williams --nextPart2129585.57Tsm9hTIC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.9.10 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBa5otInuLMrk7bIwRAqWIAJ4tIsYaeCJ4ebmpbyFkjFJaF40/GwCfTYus bOwhNwW8NJfp1uFHG1s6dm8= =z6BL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2129585.57Tsm9hTIC--