Re: [git pull] drm request 3

[Luc Verhaegen <libv@skynet.be>]

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 05:08:00PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
> > 
> > libdrm is composed of the main libdrm, and several driver specific 
> > libdrms today (... and libkms, yes).
> 
> It's actually not libdrm that is the primary issue, I'm sorry for saying 
> that.
> 
> It's the nouveau_drv.so thing - the actual X driver. 
> 
> Anyway, since I had looked at the libdrm sources, I had most of this on my 
> machine anyway, so I've compiled it all, and am going to reboot and see if 
> I can make a few symlinks work.
> 
> IOW, right now I have this:
> 
>    [root@nehalem ~]# cd /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/
>    [root@nehalem drivers]# ll nouveau_drv.so*
>    lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      21 2010-03-04 17:00 nouveau_drv.so -> nouveau_drv.so-0.0.16
>    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  343784 2010-03-04 16:59 nouveau_drv.so-0.0.15
>    -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1698805 2010-03-04 16:59 nouveau_drv.so-0.0.16
> 
> and I'll see if that works (yeah, yeah, I didn't strip the thing, and 
> it's compiled with whatever defaults that probably include debugging too, 
> so it's huge).
> 
> Quite frankly, I still think that I shouldn't have to play these kinds of 
> games. I think the versioning should be built in. And I still think that 
> "staging" is not an excuse for "it's bad crap, and we don't care"
> 
> 			Linus

In an ideal world, you shouldn't be forced to update anything except 
some/all of the driver bits.

But the fact that libdrm is lumped together as it is, and that mesa is a 
monolith, forces you to update a more significant portion of your 
system. You have to resort to some serious manual labour to get around 
that atm.

Luc Verhaegen.