Re: [Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-11 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Fre, 2002-10-11 at 04:27, David D. Hagood wrote: Michel Dänzer wrote: BTW I think this bug is fixed in XFree86 CVS. No, it is not. I've called this one out a few times, but it still persists. I cannot beleive I am the only one with a Radeon 7500 DW and a good monitor. You have

Re: [Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-11 Thread David D. Hagood
Michel Dänzer wrote: You have tried XFree86 CVS as in http://www.xfree86.org/cvs/ ? That I have NOT tried - I assumed that at that level DRI and XFree would be the same (in other words, that the primary difference would be the 3D subsystem). But I could try it, then diff the two if the

[Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-10 Thread David D. Hagood
I've just pulled the current DRI main branch, done the lndir and make World as per the compilation guide. However, when I do a make install afterword, I get the following error: beginning of install snipped `/usr/src/xc/build/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/radeon' installing in

Re: [Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-10 Thread David D. Hagood
Michel Dänzer wrote: It seems you have defined GlxBuiltInxxx for at least one driver in config/cf/host.def, which seems to be broken. It's not necessary for normal operation. A! I was trying to build in the Radeon driver, so that I could debug a SIGFPE that I am getting when I set

Re: [Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-10 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Fre, 2002-10-11 at 02:58, David D. Hagood wrote: Michel Dänzer wrote: It seems you have defined GlxBuiltInxxx for at least one driver in config/cf/host.def, which seems to be broken. It's not necessary for normal operation. A! I was trying to build in the Radeon driver, so that

Re: [Dri-devel] Error installing CVS build

2002-10-10 Thread David D. Hagood
Michel Dänzer wrote: No, that option has nothing to do with the 2D driver. You probably want #define DoLoadableServer NO OK, that will help. BTW I think this bug is fixed in XFree86 CVS. No, it is not. I've called this one out a few times, but it still persists. I cannot beleive I am