Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:37:05 -0800 From: Beech Rintoul <beech@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> Cc: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux_dri at amd64 (was: Re: What is the recommended LinuxEmulator and kernel that will run skype-devel and maybe Flash9) Message-ID: <200803171037.08538.beech@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20080317150143.nvalwznv9c08kows@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <20080315080424.13561oymhrersh8g@intranet.encontacto.net> <200803161412.05267.beech@freebsd.org> <20080317150143.nvalwznv9c08kows@webmail.leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 17 March 2008, Alexander Leidinger said: > Quoting Beech Rintoul <beech@freebsd.org> (from Sun, 16 Mar 2008 > > 13:11:59 -0900): > > On Sunday 16 March 2008, Mark Linimon said: > >> On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 04:28:42PM +0300, Boris Samorodov wrote: > >> > Seems that the case is not so strict: > >> > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/91318 > >> > >> OK, the email thread that led to the current state of this PR is > >> what I am remembering, under the vague label of "we will need > >> someone to track this when we flip it over". > >> > >> It will be instructive to look at the graphics/linux_dri row in > >> http://portsmon.freebsd.org/chartsandgraphs/package_failures_lis > >>t.a md64-6.html. > >> > >> I'm not objecting to flipping the ARCH as long as someone takes > >> a look at the dependents and does TRT with them. It sounds like > >> we already have volunteers :-) > >> > >> mcl > > > > In going through the depend list, and grepping the tree it looks > > to me like there are @20 ports affected, one of which is marked > > broken for other reasons and two which are mine. Unless there's > > ports which aren't already flagged, I don't see any serious > > breakage happening. > > > > Alexander mentioned to check for linux errors. dyeske has been > > stress testing skype and there are none. So what's next? Maybe a > > heads-up on ports@ and I'm willing to ping the individual > > maintainers and track any breakage. > > > > BTW, I posted a list of dependent ports on my wiki: > > Ok, as they are already i386 only, I don't expect a major impact by > just switching linux_dri. To be on the safe side, just have a look > again if no other port depends upon linux_dri and is marked as > amd64 too. > > Bye, > Alexander. That seems to be all of them. I'll post a heads-up to ports@ of the impending change and a link to the list of the ports in question. Beech -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Beech Rintoul - FreeBSD Developer - beech@FreeBSD.org /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | FreeBSD Since 4.x \ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | http://www.freebsd.org X - NO Word docs in e-mail | Latest Release: / \ - http://www.FreeBSD.org/releases/7.0R/announce.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200803171037.08538.beech>