From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Feb 26 2:59: 7 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA0C37B406 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 02:59:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from baraca.united.net.ua (vlan1.baraca.united.net.ua [195.234.212.67]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C58D43F75 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 02:59:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from max@vega.com) Received: from vega.vega.com (root@xDSL-2-2.united.net.ua [193.111.9.226]) by baraca.united.net.ua (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h1PMxcmo028039; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:59:38 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from max@vega.com) Received: from vega.vega.com (max@localhost.vega.com [127.0.0.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h1PMxoUk001053; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:59:50 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from max@localhost) by vega.vega.com (8.12.6/8.12.5/Submit) id h1PMxiVB001052; Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:59:44 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:59:44 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: Kris Kennaway , ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Mesa Message-ID: <20030225225944.GA1038@vega.vega.com> References: <20030225215814.GB79776@rot13.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 11:23:54PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Kris Kennaway writes: > > I assume there are issues getting the newer version to work with all > > the ports that depend on it. If you're willing to solve these > > problems then I'm sure we can get it updated. The first step is for > > you to test the new Mesa version with most or all of the ports that > > require it, and identify the failures. > > I am sure that in two years, we could at the very least have found a > way for Mesa 3 to coexist with newer versions so that ports which had > not yet been converted could go on using the old version. > > Reality check, people: Mesa-wise, we are two major versions behind the > rest of the world. You are completely missing the point. Mesa is now included into XFree86 (and the version included is exactly one currently in ports) so that upgrade to 4.x or 5.x will change nothing unless you are running an obsolete 3.x version of XFree86. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message