Hi Roberto, Just out of curiosity does /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.o exist? -- -- Tyler R. Retzlaff <rtr <at> NetBSD.org> http://www.NetBSD.org
>Just out of curiosity does /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/radeon_drv.o >exist? Yes. It is working now, the work around was to rebuild the kernel without AGP support. Thanks to Stephen Ma for the tip. (below, in case it helps somebody else) R.W. =========================================== Roberto> I am installing NetBSD 1.6.1 + XFree86 for the first time on Roberto> a Dell Lattitude laptop. XFree86.0.log> (WW) RADEON(0): Bad V_BIOS checksum Ummmm... This sounds a whole lot like the (slightly) infamous agp bug. Try building a custom kernel with the agp driver disabled (which isn't used at all by the ATI driver). - S
I suggest now that 1.6.2 is basicly in the can, and there's talk about branching for NetBSD 2.0, we should talk about importing the latest RC for 4.4.0 from XFree86. 4.4.0 is significant mainly because of the new IPv6 support, not only in the Xserver and programs, but in the protocol -- XDM auth is extended to handle 128-bit addresses. I tested the first cut from X.org's web site early this summer, and there were only minor issues with building, and now as of last month, 4.4.0 builds and runs fine. There seem to be no unrelated changes of any significance. I think we really want this in NetBSD 2.0. There was an issue with using old xdm with new Xservers (or vice-versa, I forget) with the X.org patches. If that's still present in XFree86, it could be an issue for "gdm" or "kdm". In my opinion, that would be a reason to import now, to give time to shake out the bugs, not a reason to wait. The danger of inaction is that our timing will be off, and no one will want to risk XFree86 4.4.0 going in just as NetBSD 2.0 is nearing cut-off for release. That would be a shame. If, on the other hand, the RC goes in soon, it'll be well tested by that time. Patches from RC to final should be small, so if 4.4.0 final happens to be released just as NetBSD 2.0 is in the can, the pull-up to 4.4.0 final should not be an obstacle to the 2.0 release. Frederick
Frederick Bruckman <fredb <at> immanent.net> writes: > 4.4.0 is significant mainly because of the new IPv6 support, It also supports a lot of newer cards. I think we have little choice but to bring it in. The most important issue from my point of view, though, is getting the BSD makefile stuff right when we do this. > The danger of inaction is that our timing will be off, and no one > will want to risk XFree86 4.4.0 going in just as NetBSD 2.0 is nearing > cut-off for release. That would be a shame. If, on the other hand, the > RC goes in soon, it'll be well tested by that time. Patches from RC to > final should be small, so if 4.4.0 final happens to be released just > as NetBSD 2.0 is in the can, the pull-up to 4.4.0 final should not be > an obstacle to the 2.0 release. I think this is actually not going to be an issue in practice. In the past, X upgrades have made things unstable for only a few days to a week at most. I think we can risk that -- it isn't so bad. It is also straightforward to pull up patches. This is not like the "I'm reorganizing a major kernel subsystem today" problem that often hits us just before release. Speaking informally for release engineering, it would be nice if some of the X gurus could tell us what the apparent 4.4.0 schedule looks like at this point. -- --(Continue reading)
PR 23726, which I just submitted, notes that although we install the formatted X11 man pages, we don't install the nroff for them (i.e. /usr/X11R6/man/man* are empty). If anyone cares to fix this, it would be appreciated. -- -- Perry E. Metzger perry <at> piermont.com
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Perry E.Metzger wrote: > > PR 23726, which I just submitted, notes that although we install the > formatted X11 man pages, we don't install the nroff for them > (i.e. /usr/X11R6/man/man* are empty). > > If anyone cares to fix this, it would be appreciated. The last time this came up, I was told we didn't install the raw man pages because they had to be run through "neqn" and "tbl". I just did a grep over "../xsrc/xfree/xc", and the only ".TS" and ".EQ" tags are in a handful of files in the "doc/man/X11" directory (...and they do, indeed, like terrible without "neqn" and "tbl"). All the files there, though, think they live in "3X11", not "3", anyhow. So, all that has to be done, is to, first of all, add a line to our ".../etc/man.conf": _build .3X11 /usr/bin/eqn %s | /usr/bin/tbl %s | /usr/bin/nroff -msafer -man and also add "3X11" to the search list for "/usr/X11R6/man. Then, set LibmanSuffix to "3X11" in NetBSD.cf (or perhaps "3x11" or "3x", anything but "3"), and also add lines to the InstallMan* macros in NetBSD.cf to actually install the raw pages. Finally, of course, adjust our sets lists. The bulk of the effort will involve building and rebuilding the whole tree to make sure everything falls in the right place. I don't think we have to worry about ".../src/x11" just yet -- this will get a lot(Continue reading)
In article <Pine.NEB.4.58.0312130942001.5283 <at> rapture.immanent.net>, Frederick Bruckman <fredb <at> immanent.net> writes: > I suggest now that 1.6.2 is basicly in the can, and there's talk about > branching for NetBSD 2.0, we should talk about importing the latest RC > for 4.4.0 from XFree86. There is no reason to rush the import. I'll import 4.4.0 (the final release, not a release candidate) as soon as possible after its release. Kind regards -- -- Matthias Scheler http://scheler.de/~matthias/
In article <87ad5vwjyd.fsf <at> snark.piermont.com>, "Perry E.Metzger" <perry <at> piermont.com> writes: > Speaking informally for release engineering, it would be nice if some > of the X gurus could tell us what the apparent 4.4.0 schedule looks > like at this point. The current schedule is available on the XFree86 homepage: Candidate News [04 December 2003] We have a Release Candidate for the 4.4.0 release and we are slightly off-track for making the original Release Target, as we still have allot of checking, poking, probing and testing to make sure that this Candidate is stable and secure enough to be marked with the highest accolade that this Project can bestow Release . To help in that quarter, we have available some binaries available. Kind regards -- -- Matthias Scheler http://scheler.de/~matthias/
On Sun, 14 Dec 2003, Matthias Scheler wrote: > There is no reason to rush the import. I'll import 4.4.0 (the final release, > not a release candidate) as soon as possible after its release. What version of X do we want to use for 1.6.2 then? What's currently in there (and tested, esp. for pkgsrc builds), or the new version? Assuming that we're rather late in the 1.6.2 release cycle, I'd vote for 4.3.0 (or whatever we have right now)... - Hubert -- -- ___ _ _ _ _ * Harddisk Image Cloning * / __| | || | | | www.feyrer.de/g4u/ | (_ |_ _| |_| | \___| |_| \___/ v1.12 out now, including partition support!
In article <Pine.GSO.4.53.0312142103330.15563 <at> rfhpc8317>, Hubert Feyrer <hubert.feyrer <at> informatik.fh-regensburg.de> writes: > What version of X do we want to use for 1.6.2 then? As release engineering said several times before: XFree86 4.3.0 (or 3.3.6). > ... I'd vote for 4.3.0 (or whatever we have right now)... There was never any plan to ship 1.6.2 with something else. Kind regards -- -- Matthias Scheler http://scheler.de/~matthias/
RSS Feed6 | |
|---|---|
3 | |
13 | |
20 | |
4 | |
5 | |
26 | |
16 | |
4 | |
7 | |
13 | |
4 | |
7 | |
5 | |
3 | |
13 | |
1 | |
4 | |
10 | |
7 | |
8 | |
6 | |
6 | |
31 | |
5 | |
9 | |
12 | |
15 | |
26 | |
17 | |
4 | |
28 | |
23 | |
22 | |
11 | |
9 | |
3 | |
9 | |
16 | |
31 | |
17 | |
5 | |
35 | |
12 | |
33 | |
76 | |
18 | |
18 | |
57 | |
60 | |
43 | |
26 | |
52 | |
67 | |
14 | |
30 | |
23 | |
14 | |
14 | |
21 | |
15 | |
21 | |
5 | |
4 | |
15 | |
17 | |
9 | |
1 | |
2 | |
15 | |
53 | |
66 | |
78 | |
9 | |
6 | |
23 | |
15 | |
7 | |
5 | |
27 | |
12 | |
7 | |
23 | |
27 | |
5 | |
8 | |
15 | |
48 | |
10 | |
5 | |
12 | |
8 | |
10 | |
53 | |
9 | |
27 | |
106 | |
8 | |
58 | |
23 | |
29 | |
26 | |
11 | |
10 | |
19 | |
51 | |
12 | |
45 | |
108 | |
22 | |
105 | |
36 | |
31 | |
60 | |
8 | |
23 | |
20 | |
42 | |
11 | |
9 | |
87 | |
27 | |
30 | |
24 | |
19 | |
14 | |
74 | |
15 | |
42 | |
34 | |
15 | |
27 | |
17 |
