On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 04:18:39PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 15:50:29 +0200, Luc Verhaegen wrote: > > > On Tue, May 01, 2012 at 03:40:53PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 18:21:23 +0100, Luc Verhaegen wrote: > > > > > > > From: Luc Verhaegen <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > This change makes Xv support slightly less nice, but should, in itself, > > > > not deteriorate things too much, as most drivers function acceptably > > > > without reputimage. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Luc Verhaegen <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > configure.ac | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > > src/apm_video.c | 4 ++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > > Seems like this was never pushed? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Julien > > > > I never pushed it myself, if that is what you mean. > > > Any particular reason? > > Cheers, > Julien
Didn't think i needed to do so myself. There is this split between how individual X components are being handled, apparently. I only committed to my own unichrome driver, and thought that the maintainer of apm or the X.org release manager would be the only one allowed to commit to apm these days. Luc Verhaegen. _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
