Dear Thomas,
you released version 0.1.0 [1]. Could you please explain to me, why the framebuffer patches (intelfb, radeonfb) are not needed anymore?
Thanks a lot,
Paul
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:21:18AM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
you released version 0.1.0 [1]. Could you please explain to me, why the framebuffer patches (intelfb, radeonfb) are not needed anymore?
since version 0.1.0 you will not need DRM from GIT anymore. You just can use DRM as provided by the standard kernel shipped with debian 5.0 (lenny). This should ease the handling of the patch (see [2]).
In the course of that I concentrated the patches in
drm-radeon-intel.patch (version 0.0.11 and older) fb-radeon-intel.patch
to one file
fb-drm-radeon-intel.patch (since version 0.1.0)
Cheers Thomas
[1] http://lowbyte.de/vga-sync-fields/vga-sync-fields/ [2] http://lowbyte.de/vga-sync-fields/vga-sync-fields/INSTALL
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 11:34:30AM +0200, Thomas Hilber wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 12:21:18AM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
you released version 0.1.0 [1]. Could you please explain to me, why the framebuffer patches (intelfb, radeonfb) are not needed anymore?
since version 0.1.0 you will not need DRM from GIT anymore. You just can use DRM as provided by the standard kernel shipped with debian 5.0 (lenny). This should ease the handling of the patch (see [2]).
Does Lenny have some extra patches in the kernel, or does it work with all vanilla 2.6.26+ kernels?
-- Pasi
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 08:32:21PM +0300, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
Does Lenny have some extra patches in the kernel, or does it work with all vanilla 2.6.26+ kernels?
for sure has Lenny some extra patches in the kernel. But probably they don't interfere with the vga-sync-fields (FRC) patch. I mean you should give vanilla 2.6.26+ a try...
Cheers Thomas
-
Pasi Kärkkäinen -
Paul Menzel -
Thomas Hilber