> Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 06:08:33 +1000 > from: matthew green <[email protected]> > > Martin Husemann writes: > > [Updating from 5 to 6 and then 7 ends up with libdrm.so from 6] > > > > The definitive answer should be in the set lists, see below for various > > branches: > > > > src-5/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.2.4 > > src-6-0/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.2 > > src-6-1/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.2 > > src-6/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.3 > > src-7-0/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.2 > > src-7-1/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.2 > > src-7/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.2 > > src/distrib/sets/lists/xbase/shl.mi:./usr/X11R7/lib/libdrm.so.3.4 > > > > So: yes, something looks wrong in -6. It comes from: > > > > Update libdrm to 2.4.36. > > Enable radeon KMS support in xf86-video-ati so that a netbsd-6 > > userland will work with a more recent (netbsd-7 and up) kernel. > > [mrg, ticket #1326] > > > > Matt, erroneous bump in that ticket, or some pullup missing for -7? > > We may have to teach postinstall about it, but that would be a pain. > > i'm not sure. i guess missing pullup, but i'd have to check the > whole thing to be sure.
It appears libdrm 2.4.36 was pulled up to netbsd-6 in ticket #1326, but while the libdrm 2.4.59 sources in xsrc/external/mit/libdrm/dist were pulled up to netbsd-7 in #463, no shlib_version bump in src/external/mit/xorg/lib/libdrm made it to netbsd-7.
