| 1 |
> I have a patch that fixes SSE problems on 2.4 kernels. However, on 2.6 |
| 2 |
> kernels it breaks OpenGL (applications segfault). |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Currently I'm applying this patch if /usr/src/linux is linked to a 2.4 |
| 5 |
> kernel at compile-time. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> This means that if a user emerges xfree when linked to a 2.4 kernel, |
| 8 |
> that user will need to remerge xfree after moving to 2.6 kernels. This |
| 9 |
> takes about 40 minutes on a ~2GHz x86. However, if this patch is not |
| 10 |
> applied, the bug will continue to exist for all Gentoo users on 2.4 |
| 11 |
> kernels. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
It appears that the larger part of our user base is running a 2.4 series kernel, |
| 14 |
and will be for quite some time. Considering this, and our position that |
| 15 |
testing kernels are not offically supported, I think we should give priority to |
| 16 |
fixing bugs that affect the most users. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> My request to you is: |
| 19 |
> 1) Is this acceptable? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I find this acceptable under the condition that it is properly documented in |
| 22 |
both postinst and ChangeLog. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> 2) If not, what is a better solution? Dropping the patch entirely? Note |
| 25 |
> that I don't know Mesa/programming well enough to write a patch |
| 26 |
> compatible for both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
The one caveat I can think of is GRP. Will we distribute a package for both |
| 29 |
kernels? How does portage choose the right one? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> Thanks, |
| 32 |
> Donnie |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
--tseng |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives