Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:31:51 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: miwi@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: xf86-video-intel and UMS Message-ID: <4D74FA67.9050407@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinS0PYTJfjB5t88dkJMjN9H0V-i-P2n6Otb2bWu@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTinerUWHxiV9YrzHKRimqPAaPEaQhyME-oS9uju1@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTi=WfitL6YMqB%2B7qKqwbjH8TUs0aLAaQufBPTbjq@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTin71eOjJYQUDO5X%2Bc8tEetvGrhXoa7WbJ%2By3mz6@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTin_X1trb7xZjVv37qQtyL6mVpbq08A8oxggVcCs@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinS0PYTJfjB5t88dkJMjN9H0V-i-P2n6Otb2bWu@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 05/03/2011 14:32 Martin Wilke said the following: > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org> wrote: > >> 2011/3/4 Lucius Windschuh <lwindschuh@googlemail.com>: >>> 2011/3/4 Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>: >>>> Can someone explain why is xf86-video-intel 2.7.1 used in ports? Unless >>>> I missed something, the GIT repository in FDO has more recent branches >>>> where UMS hasn't been removed yet: >>>> >>>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-intel/log/?h=2.8 >>>> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-intel/log/?h=2.9 >>>> >>>> Is 2.7.1 really the latest portable version? >>> >>> It's at least the last version that works reliably and is compatible >>> to our libdrm, as I see it. >>> The xf86-video-intel v2.9 triggers assertions in our libdrm_intel.so.1 >>> (just tested it) :-( >> >> Why not upgrade libdrm then? Is there a problem with versions >> newer than 2.4.17? >> >> > FreeBSD doen't have GEM and KSM support yet.. I use libdrm 2.4.21 in my environment without any problems. So GEM and KMS do not seem to be required. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D74FA67.9050407>