On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 4:25 AM didier gaumet <[email protected]> wrote: > > Le 03/07/2026 à 18:25, Boyan Penkov a écrit : > [...] > > The issue presents itself on both libgallium 25 from Trixie and > > libgallium 26 from testing. > > Have you tried libgallium 25 from Trixie-backports? I have observed that > sometimes when you use a backports kernel you need adequate backported > libraries. > From the modification journal of mesa-libgallium (trixie-backports): > "[...] > * Lower libdrm-dev to 2.4.124-1 to match the version in Trixie > [...]" > which suggests that mesa-libgallium from Testing is likely to create > problems in Trixie.
Good to know -- however, I was surprised that libdrm-dev is not installed on my system at all, so I'll keep it in mind. Nor is libdrm... > > I would advise you against performing dist-upgrades of a stable Debian > distro: dist-upgrades are meant only for major version upgrades, and > even then, they are meant to take place only after an ordinary upgrade. Hey Didier -- your perspective here is very welcome, since I had gathered that "dist-upgrade" was the more general operation (which will pull in new packages as new deps), and do it by default. > > Possibly you could also assert if you need at all backports and > fasttrack repos for other purposes, because your hardware being not the > latest (at least the graphic card), it does not seem to need that. And > the reliablity of a Stable Debian is greater than that of a > Stable+backports(+fasttrack) one > Again, thanks for the pointer -- I had assumed that backports was basically as well tested as stable. Somehow I keep thinking that new kernel improvements (say, io_uring marching forward), will make my CPU-based simulations and data processing (pipeline is basically IO a terabyte in with Python, do some bookkeeping with Python, call a C extension to do some big array loops, do some small Python bookkeeping, and IO ~100 MB with Python) faster, and maybe I should back off on this... -- Boyan Penkov
