On Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 07:34:48PM -0500, Jason Lunz wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 12:59AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > Right, and failure to regress on those chipsets is good enough for me. > > > > Any takers? > > I have one of these new Dells at home running sarge/sid with an i910 > (915? 9xx anyway) chipset, and I use a Dell at work with i865. I also > have access at work to another type of dell workstation with a third > type of intel chipset, iirc. So I can test 2, maybe 3 chipsets, and am > willing to help develop as well. > > I have a middling amount of debian packaging experience and plenty of > build maintenance experience, so I think I can take this on. I'll get > started by reading HACKING.txt and getting things building this weekend > most likely.
Well, essentially, a patch would need to be prepped that resembled debian/patches/000_stolen_from_xorg_nv_driver.diff (in the Debian xfree86 source package), but updated the i810 driver directory instead. The bad news is that no more updates to xfree86 for sarge are planned. A case can of course be made for this hardware support, but at this point I'd need to involve the release management team. > What's the word on this licensing issue? I'm uncertain from reading all > the emails in this bug which codebases might or might not be tainted. David Mart�nez Moreno appears to have addressed this issue. If you get your patches from freedesktop.org CVS, it shouldn't be a problem. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | Ab abusu ad usum non valet [EMAIL PROTECTED] | consequentia. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
