Hi Mark,
Just tried amd64 snapshot (1st Nov) on Intel NUC5i7RYH and building
world from source (updated around 4PM UTC, 1st Nov).
While I do not get any kernel panic or crash as others may have faced,
the behavior of some programs such as firefox, dillo under X (startx
with default install) will
I somehow missed this thread before posting to misc@. I’m using the Nov
1 snapshot with an OpenBSD-only EFI install on the internal SSD of a
2013 MacBook Air and inteldrm(4) does attach but immediately after the
display is corrupted. I can start X just fine but the corruption
remains. I can quit
On Oct 26 13:31:14, h...@stare.cz wrote:
> On Oct 24 23:48:01, mark.kette...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> > The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> > vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> > intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like
On Sat, 24 Oct 2015 23:48:01 +0200 (CEST)
Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
On Oct 24 23:48:01, mark.kette...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into inteldrm(4), but
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 09:38:14PM +0100, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 15:51:54 +1100
> > From: Jonathan Gray
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> >
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 15:51:54 +1100
> From: Jonathan Gray
>
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> > vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> >
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into
On Sat Oct 24 2015 23:48, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> This diff needs to be tested on a wide range of hardware. So if you
> have a machine with inteldrm(4), please give it a shot. I'm
> particularly interested in testing on an x40.
No problems on my Thinkpad T400 (also running X11).
OpenBSD
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 08:20:50AM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
> [...]
> This looks like the result of applying the diff but not running config
> [...]
Thanks for the clue bat. It's working fine on a Thinkpad T400.
--
Gregor
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 08:20:50AM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Gregor Best wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> This diff needs to be tested on a wide range of hardware.
> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 23:48:01 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis
>
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to
* Jonathan Gray [2015-10-25 05:51]:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> > vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> > intagp(4) a child of
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 15:50:51 +0100
> From: Stefan Sperling
>
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> > vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> >
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into
The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
intagp(4) into inteldrm(4), but that's going to be a bit more work.
This diff is needed to
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:48:01PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> The diff below makes inteldrm(4) attach directly to pci(4) instead of
> vga(1). Because inteldrm(4) depends on intagp(4), this also make
> intagp(4) a child of inteldrm(4). Ultimately I'd like to integrate
> intagp(4) into
20 matches
Mail list logo