From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Juan Quintela Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:46:34 +0000 Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: Linux 2.4.17-pre6 drm-4.0 Message-Id: List-Id: References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> "marcelo" = Marcelo Tosatti writes: marcelo> On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 11:13:15AM -0800, David Mosberger wrote: >> > In my opinion it's extremely bad style to remove drm-4.0 from the 2.4 >> > kernel (remember, it's supposed to be a *stable* kernel series). >> >> Agreed. Stil I don't think specific ports should fix that up - this >> will sooner or later leed to a full fork. >> >> > As >> > far as I know, there are binary-only drivers out there that work only >> > with drm-4.0. I don't think it's fair to break someones working setup >> > just because of a kernel upgrade. >> >> _Any_ kernel update may break binary drivers. >> >> > But if there is a good reason to remove it, I'm certainly willing to >> > listen. My understanding is that for Keith it's good enough if >> > drm-4.0 goes away in 2.5. >> >> My opinion is that including the drm changes in the ia64 patch just makes >> the diff to handle much bigger. >> >> Marcelo, are you willing to put in drm 4.0 as option in 2.4.18 again? marcelo> Why would I ? marcelo> What is wrong with the current drm version ? That you need to have XFree 4.1 installed, if you have XFree4.0, then you can't have drm :( Yes, that drm is incompatible sucks :( Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy