On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 09:02:57AM +0100, Alan Hourihane wrote: > On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 21:50 -0500, Bob Tracy wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 05:25:29PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 05:08:00PM -0400, Matt Turner wrote: > > > > I'd like to drop support for non-BWX Alphas (EV4 and original EV5) > > > > from X. These machines can't load/store to single bytes and require > > > > special sparse memory mappings. > > > > > > > > The code required to select which functions (sparse, dense) is > > > > convoluted, adds an extra layer of indirection, probably gets close to > > > > zero usage, and even less testing. > > > > > > > > Does anyone use X on EV4 or EV5 (not EV56, EV56 has BWX)? > > > > > > Well I have a few EV56's, so those are fine. I think one machine I have > > > is an EV5 or maybe even an EV4, but it only has 32MB of ram so it is > > > totally useless as debian can't run on it. > > > > > > So I personally wouldn't notice the change. Anyone else out there? > > > > Got a PWS 433au: EV56. Proposed change would have no impact here. > > I do have a Multia (21066 CPU) with the 21030 graphics chip which was > used to write the DEC TGA driver, so we'd lose that, but I'm not sure > how many people are still using the TGA's.
I've got a working TGA I can use for testing if push comes to shove, but I replaced it with a Radeon RV200 QW [Radeon 7500] ages ago. Wouldn't use the TGA again except as a last resort: truly a case of "bad breath is better than no breath." --Bob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
