: 031d00676b0263beafba0b26060e49bf7ba52791
http://xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual/driver/xf86-video-radeonhd-1.2.3.tar.gz
MD5: ab80697ad0b7a064137ebce4076465fb
SHA1: b7b09d56fb865b9d44d1f8b9b3dda8e6e60d4d95
Luc Verhaegen.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
radeonhd
We already have a Radeon driver.
Once again, a very unbiased opinion by Mr Stone.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:08:49PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:57:03AM -0700, Daniel Stone wrote:
xorg.modules |7 ---
1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
New commits:
commit aa066db9fe03e39156ebd2416aea25ac72408d99
Author: Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:48:05PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:40:08PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
It's also remarkable how this was dropped from this list initially.
You didn't even bother to contact any of the very active and reachable
developers
is negligible.
Luc Verhaegen.
SUSE X Driver Developer.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 09:51:45AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 18:15 +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Is there a single technical reason why shipping both is a problem?
For the same reason the kernel avoids shipping multiple drivers for the
same hardware -- we want
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 03:00:49PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 05:16:18PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 06:15:58PM +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Is there a single technical reason why shipping both is a problem?
If you're
on i386 linux
vm86 mode is a bad idea anyway, and using the emulator everywhere
means we get a consistent set of bugs.
What triggered this choice, where was this discussed?
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http
/msg02622.html
Thanks and happy new year to all,
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
(deliberately breaking thread to get more attention :), and yes,
diseased mind.)
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 06:19:26PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Hi all,
With FOSDEM moved 3 weeks earlier than usual, i no longer have the best
part of January to leisurely beg around for speakers for our
friday night to tell
me about it still :)
Thanks,
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
Hi Everyone,
Final announcement about our DevRoom this year (promise) :)
http://wiki.x.org/wiki/fosdem2009
All the info you need is either on there or on the fosdem main site.
Hope to see many people there,
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg
and that therefor
older hw might not work properly or might need special workarounds or
that atombios does not help you to set this up.
I believe that nvidia did the legwork at the dix side as iirc they made
it work with their binary-only driver.
Luc Verhaegen
on the (you guessed it) wiki:
http://wiki.x.org/wiki/fosdem2010
Also, i am once again tempted to reserve some seats at the smashingly
excellent belgian restaurant the Mirabelle on saturday evening, so
please drop me a note if you would like to join.
See you all there!
Luc Verhaegen
of the planet, then please get me your
name, the talk title and a small abstract for a talk ASAP.
Thanks.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
http://wiki.x.org/wiki/fosdem2010
The current schedule (as it will be printed in the booklet too):
* 10.00: ...
* 11.00: ...
* 12.00: ...
* 13.00: Daniel Stone : Polishing X11 and making it shiny.
* 14.00: Luc Verhaegen : The free software desktop’s graphics driver
stack.
* 15.00: Jerome Glisse
much
it will cost will improve response time to any request, now that time is
getting
tight. No promises we'll say yes, but the odds are much higher if you ask
than
if you don't.)
It is not a money thing here. People just cannot be bothered much it
seems.
Luc Verhaegen
to the board.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
://www.x.org/wiki/BoardOfDirectors/Elections
page it states:
Both that page and the candidates statement page are also linked to from the
ballot screen.
Ah, thanks for the explanation and for blending in the current
affiliations on the wiki too.
Luc Verhaegen
in the past?
Is there any chance that this important information becomes available to
the X.org Foundation members still?
Thanks,
Luc Verhaegen.
[1]
http://www.x.org/wiki/BylawReview?action=AttachFiledo=gettarget=ProposedBylawsRevised20061029.pdf
[2] http://www.x.org/wiki/BodMeetingSummaries
who confirmed my sentiments.
If someone needs help splitting his board meeting irc logs, i will be
happy to lend a hand. I am sure that many who, like me, still need to
vote will be happy to have a scroll through them, before making their
decision.
Luc Verhaegen
already know.
Cheers,
Daniel
It will at least give us an idea as to why we are voting at all.
Currently we have absolutely nothing to go by.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
not represent an
official statement on behalf of the Foundation, etc, etc.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 06:31:32PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
The X.org Foundation exists to best represent the interests of the X.org
Foundation members, by being the legal entity responsible for the state
, it is not just a feeling.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 05:01:11PM -0800, Stuart Kreitman wrote:
On 02/10/10 03:43 PM, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 03:17:16PM -0800, Stuart Kreitman wrote:
On 02/10/10 11:47 AM, Daniel Stone wrote:
(tl;dr: Yes, I agree that the Foundation needs to be doing a lot
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 05:26:15PM -0800, Stuart Kreitman wrote:
On 02/10/10 05:14 PM, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Like last year, there are no FOSDEM costs. After some questions were
raised about the social event, I decided to also forgo asking X.org
sponsorship for that.
No point in debating
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 12:48:48AM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 03:22:12PM -0800, Barton C Massey wrote:
In message 20100210173132.gb3...@skynet.be you wrote:
This is what the bylaws state: The Board shall keep
minutes of its meetings in which shall be recorded all
, FOSDEM 2010 and Videohackfest from the top of his head.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 07:26:35AM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:21:28 +0100, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
Can we get some more details here please? Alanc also mentioned ssl
certificates, FOSDEM 2010 and Videohackfest from the top of his head.
We haven't paid
at
$3.95 a month that MIT can at $250/month ?
In fairness, I believe there are four machines currently racked up, even
if three of them are doing nothing whatsoever.
Cheers,
Daniel
Cool, can one be used to back up our home directories?
Luc Verhaegen
? This is strange as, according to the above
email i would've expected a meeting between 23:00 and 0:00 CET.
I guess that in such a case, noone will have any issues with me posting
the log, both here and on the wiki.
Luc Verhaegen.
17:42 -!- libv [~l...@dsl01.83.171.182.19.ip-pool.nefkom.net] has joined
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:29:04PM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 02:02:21PM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Daniel Stone wrote:
#xorg-bod on OFTC, fortnightly. I think it's something like 10AM
Wednesdays, Portland time?
For TZ=US/Pacific
to alter their vote? Is there anyone here who
thinks that he has not enough information available today to be able to
vote at all?
Thanks,
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 05:29:14PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 06:01:38PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
I believe some things have been asked for already:
* minutes or logs.
Bart is collating his logs, and those will be posted very soon.
* details
. This is a bold and above all honest move. I also appreciate
that you are answering questions here, as there is far too little
response from several people.
Have fun!
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http
to respond earlier.
As brought up before; elections are pretty much the only event where
anyone gets to see concrete things from the board.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo
here.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
enterprise service providers see
what sort of big clients, who are now investing a ton of money and
manpower in a windows based solution, they just lost out on.
Richard, who provided you with support before? As i doubt that such a
move means that everything was done in-house before.
Luc Verhaegen
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 08:25:12PM -0500, Richard Brown wrote:
I do apologise for the tone of my original letter. We will be staying
with X in the future and we will not be moving to another platform.
Your large corporation certainly has a lightning fast decision making
process.
Luc
at :
http://people.freedesktop.org/~libv/BOD/
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
@ is basically a dead list, except around elections. I personally
am all for re-using it. Also, an archive of the ml would be handy too.
Thanks for looking into these things!
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg mailing list
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org
http
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:08:35AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 12:35:08AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Luc Verhaegen wrote:
members@ is basically a dead list, except around elections. I personally
am all for re-using it. Also, an archive of the ml would be handy
the handover, will have to do the labour to
create this, thank you for this), i am wondering; are there such reports
for the previous years? If not, is there still enough data available for
creating such reports?
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:28:39AM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Modularized dri drivers and an SDK enabled mesa tree are available in my
personal git repos at http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~libv/
The SDK enabled mesa tree adds to the mesa build system to create shared
libraries libmesadri
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 01:28:28AM -0700, Corbin Simpson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:28:39AM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Modularized dri drivers and an SDK enabled mesa tree are available in my
personal git repos
this are mostly afraid of. Ideas like
this can no longer be swept under the carpet with impossible.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman
here you
can easily make up in the driver internal interfaces. And then the other
synergies come weighing in.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:46:37PM +0100, Nicolai Haehnle wrote:
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:24 AM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
In
particular, the Mesa core - classic driver split only makes sense if
there are enough people who are actually working on those drivers who
would support
and the server all back in one
repository?
Thanks.
Luc Verhaegen.
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/xorg-de...@lists.x.org/msg02128.html
[2] http://xfree86.org/pipermail/forum/2003-March/000128.html
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives
license.
* useful verbosity.
* dumping of only the main edid block to mmm-.edid (just 128bytes as
i am too lazy to do things properly).
So, vbe-edid is available here:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~libv/vbe-edid
For interpreting the edid block, use xorg/app/edid-decode.
Luc Verhaegen
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 08:14:19PM +0200, Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
Am 16.10.10, 17:48 +0200 schrieb Luc Verhaegen:
When looking into #24348 i dug out the read-edid code to see what i
needed to do to separately test the failing 0x4F01 call on vbe with
vm86.
I ended up rewriting the get-edid
, who has root access to annarchy or any other of the servers, and who
thought this would be funny, and who deserves to lose his access right
here, right now?
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:32:30PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Radeonhd repo:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-radeonhd/commit/?h=spigot
authorSPIGOT r...@jerkcity.com 2010-11-02 04:21:14 (GMT)
committer SPIGOT r...@jerkcity.com 2010-11-02 04:21:14
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:47:19PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:32:30PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Radeonhd repo:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-radeonhd/commit/?h=spigot
author SPIGOT r...@jerkcity.com 2010-11-02 04:21:14 (GMT
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:25:33AM -0500, Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 13:57 +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
It is clear that this is not a normal security breach, as this
commit is
fully in line with the naming scheme used by fd.o. Plus, given the
history of radeonhd
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 08:32:10AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Gaetan Nadon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 13:57 +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
It is clear that this is not a normal security breach, as this
commit is
fully in line with the naming scheme used by fd.o. Plus, given
to the xserver alone since 1.9 was
released on August 20.
Matt
This here is not a joke at all.
Stop downplaying it.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:24:12PM -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 13:32 +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Radeonhd repo:
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-radeonhd/commit/?h=spigot
author SPIGOT r...@jerkcity.com 2010-11-02 04:21:14 (GMT
is not exactly the fastest of
organs, even though i feel that it has become better since the last
elections and the crap throwing that happened before and after them.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http
mistyped repository), was
not the right course of action.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
Your subscription
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:36:17PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
See, this was exactly the problem here. It _was_ a freedesktop admin.
And it was pretty clear that it was that from the onset too. Mailing
fd.o admins, even
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:01:19PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:36:17PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
See, this was exactly
the evildoing is getting more flack than the person(s) doing it.
Luc Verhaegen
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
Your subscription address
mailing just fd.o admins
was not the best of options here. Two of the fd.o admins were
responsible for this :(
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 08:27:12PM +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote:
On 24/11/10 19:38 , Luc Verhaegen wrote:
Conspiracy theories?
I did not imply that you were the one starting with the conspiracy
theories, and I think strictly speaking there was no name-calling in
that thread either so I
of power and a severe breach of trust that damages the whole of
fd.o and x.org?
Why do i find myself having to explain this still, i would've expected
this was clear by now.
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http
this
on irc 2) shrug and walk away.
Do you find this acceptable behaviour for the secretary of the X.org
board?
Since i am pasting irclog, attached is more irc log, showing several
people at their best (including me).
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 10:01:20PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:40:54PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
We could probably better define this sort of things, again fd.o has
been a pretty haphazard setup based on volunteer time and effort, but
again hopefully we can get
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 07:39:48AM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:01 AM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 06:40:54PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
We could probably better define this sort of things, again fd.o has
been a pretty haphazard setup
, proof that i am not a donkey :) I made the gabe/kemper
mistake last week in privmsg as well (dig corrected me then).
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http
that you're coming (email, irc, phone), so i can forewarn
the staff, my phonenumber still is the same (german) one. They can
handle a surge, but i would like to know whether we should just get a
table for a handful of people or if we need to grab a whole floor like
last year.
Luc Verhaegen
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org 2011-02-09 06:36:31
PST ---
done
Root access restored, i presume?
Luc Verhaegen
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:17:50AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 08:19:09AM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:56:04AM +0100, Eirik Byrkjeflot Anonsen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 03:02:58PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
Yes. Tollef's opinion
Foundation?
Luc Verhaegen.
___
xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
Your subscription address: arch...@mail-archive.com
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 02:44:05PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 03:02:56PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:47:25AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
If you actually wanted to find out, you could go ask someone,
First the following question needs
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 04:01:01PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 02:44:05PM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 03:02:56PM +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:47:25AM +, Daniel Stone wrote:
If you actually wanted to find out
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 07:25:21AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
On 02/10/11 07:07 AM, Luc Verhaegen wrote:
It seems that a useful and representative X.org board is needed, and
that their primary responsibility should be the funding and maintenance
of dependable infrastructure
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:39:54AM -0800, Corbin Simpson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Luc Verhaegen l...@skynet.be wrote:
So it is better to leave this current situation as is, and have a major
part of the infrastructure that X.org and others depend on what i
honestly cannot
78 matches
Mail list logo
