Hi again,
Especially with the accelerated release cycle of Mesa, it would be
great if Fedora could keep up in the same manner as it does with the
kernel.
Mesa 10.1 is effectively dead with 10.2 beeing considered old, stable
and boring now.
So the descision is not between shipping
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 13:40:35 +0200,
Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any unofficial reporsitories for Mesa-10.2 or 10.3 git?
Reason is I've bought a few games on steam and would like to play
them, but the Intel OpenGL driver in mesa 10.1 doesn't work well.
Now with
Hi Wolf,
Rebuilding the source rpm usually isn't a problem. You could get a 10.2.5
srpm from f21 or a 10.3 srpm from rawhide.
Mesa consists of about ~20 packages :/
Regards
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Wolf,
Rebuilding the source rpm usually isn't a problem. You could get a 10.2.5
srpm from f21 or a 10.3 srpm from rawhide.
Mesa consists of about ~20 packages :/
Not sure if this can help or not... But,
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Chad Kellerman sunck...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Wolf,
Rebuilding the source rpm usually isn't a problem. You could get a
10.2.5
srpm from f21 or a 10.3 srpm from rawhide.
Mesa
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 13:56:30 +0200,
Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Wolf,
Rebuilding the source rpm usually isn't a problem. You could get a 10.2.5
srpm from f21 or a 10.3 srpm from rawhide.
Mesa consists of about ~20 packages :/
Are you sure you're not counting rpms?
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Clemens Eisserer linuxhi...@gmail.com
wrote:
Are there any unofficial reporsitories for Mesa-10.2 or 10.3 git?
Reason is I've bought a few games on steam and would like to play
them, but the Intel OpenGL driver in mesa 10.1 doesn't work well.
Now with the
On 15.08.2014, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Are you sure you're not counting rpms? It looks like there are 4 packages
that have mesa as the start of their name. There will be some others that
need to get rebuilt in order to link with the updated mesa. I can believe
that the latter set could get
Once upon a time, Heinz Diehl htd...@fritha.org said:
On 15.08.2014, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Are you sure you're not counting rpms? It looks like there are 4 packages
that have mesa as the start of their name. There will be some others that
need to get rebuilt in order to link with the
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 16:21:51 +0200,
Heinz Diehl htd...@fritha.org wrote:
On 15.08.2014, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
Are you sure you're not counting rpms? It looks like there are 4 packages
that have mesa as the start of their name. There will be some others that
need to get rebuilt in order
On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:21:51 +0200
Heinz Diehl wrote:
Wrt the mix of 32/64 bit packages (on my system), I would consider
rebuilding them a nightmare..
Another thing you might consider: I installed the Fedora 21 Branched
since I got tired of waiting for an official alpha release. It works
OK
On 08/03/2014 09:37 AM, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Especially with the accelerated release cycle of Mesa, it would be
great if Fedora could keep up in the same manner as it does with the
kernel.
Mesa 10.1 is effectively dead with 10.2 beeing considered old, stable
and boring now.
So the descision
Hi,
First of all thanks for Fedora, I am a (most-time) happy user since
Fedora 2 and it is really great to see how all the improvements
accumulated over time.
Especially with the accelerated release cycle of Mesa, it would be
great if Fedora could keep up in the same manner as it does with the
13 matches
Mail list logo
