On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 06:03:41PM -0500, David Dawes wrote: >On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 11:55:58AM -0500, David Dawes wrote: >>On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 10:05:38AM +0000, Alan Hourihane wrote: > >>>But isn't it better to move forward than backwards ? >>> >>>If the result is no better, then we need to fix the problems found. Going >>>back to an older version, and just because it builds, doesn't guarantee it's >>>going to work any better either. >>> >>>I've got more faith in the current DRM CVS as people are actively working >>>on it, rather than using an older snapshot that people could be unwilling >>>to go back and fix if a problem was found. >> >>I'd like to see a version that is proven to build, work, and fit in with >>our requirements before making any final decision on this. The snapshot >>we currently have imported is clearly not a good one. >> >>Otherwise, going back to the version of the kernel modules that we shipped >>with 4.4.0 won't be too difficult, especially if the user-mode side has >>the level of backward compatibility that people have claimed. > >Is there any update on this?
Since the DRM people are not able to come up with a working version, I'm rolling back to the version that we shipped with 4.4.0 as a base for 4.5.0, and I'll work from there. David _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@XFree86.Org http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
