Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] What's the state of xorg branch?

sm-discuss AT

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Robin Cook <rcook AT>
  • To: sm-discuss AT
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] What's the state of xorg branch?
  • Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 16:03:39 -0500

Just recasting may not fix it. I had the libpthread-stubs problem and the
only way to fix it was to delete the *.la files in /usr/include and then
recast the spells.

Robin Cook

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 13:58:07 -0400
Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 4:49 AM, Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > the intel driver just crashed on me thus gave a reminder about the
> > current version being 2.20.0, not 2.14.0 . As always, there is the hope
> > that the newer version is less crash-happy than the old one (hey --- I'm
> > now down to crashes of Xorg instead of GPU freezes, yay!).
> >
> > Now, the new version wants a slightly fresher graphics stack, most
> > importantly xorg-server 1.10 . How is the state of our xorg devel branch?
> > Wouldn't it be time to get off xorg-server 1.8?
> >
> > I guess should just switch to that branch ... but perhaps merging is near?
> >
> >
> > Alrighty then,
> >
> > Thomas
> AFAIK, the main issue is that the libpthread-stubs update requires a
> lot of spells to be recast, but they are not all covered by
> I'm currently working on that. I just got all of KDE to build earlier
> this week. I want to to try and get a bunch of it done this weekend
> since I'm going on vacation for 2 weeks starting Monday. I should
> probably test gnome's libs out as well though, but enough of those
> spells are broken as well that I need to get around to fixing them. I
> do already have a good idea what is needed to get spells that depend
> on gtk working again, since made a list when I switched my main box
> over to devel-xorg. But, I need to double check them, since I was
> randomly recasting spells to keep track of what fixes what. I really
> want to get this down ASAP so I can start on other things.
> If you don't want to be randomly recasting a bunch of spells, I
> suggest waiting if possible. cleanse --fix will find most spells that
> need recasting, but not all of them ime.
> But then again, as David stated, it may be a while before it gets
> merged in master.
> I'll make some master bugs later today for the various branches that I
> am aware of, so we can keep better track of this stuff. I've been
> meaning to do that for the past week.
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM, David Kowis <dkowis AT> wrote:
> > What is the necessary criteria for merging?
> >
> > Works on 10 peoples graphics cards?
> >
> > A successful upgrade path?
> >
> > It's probably not feasible to get all the graphics drivers tested.
> >
> > I'd like for someone with experience in the X branch to come up with a
> > list of criteria, maybe search the list history for issues people have
> > had upgrading, and then build a test plan, or a checklist to verify that
> > we won't have these issues on this upgrade.
> >
> > Then once that passes, we'll merge it. Sound good?
> Thank you for this post. I was going to ask the same questions after I
> made the bug reports.
> Can someone do this for glibc as well?
> AFAIK, no one who's tested it has had any major issues. It's much more
> stable than glibc 2.15 for me after I applied the patches I added to
> the spell.
> This is a major spell, so it should be tested better, but I think that
> pretty much anyone who is willing to test out the branch has already
> done so.
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page