Originally posted by debianxfce
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Radeon X.Org Driver Now Only Uses DRI3 By Default With GLAMOR
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by bridgman View PostSure, but that's the whole point we are discussing here - whether to backport a complex change late in the release cycle or tell users of ioquake-based games to pick up WIP 3.9.x or 4.0. Both options suck in their own unique ways.
One is cca 50 days llvm regression, second is cca 4 months mesa regression and third one sit there cca forever
For what i do care is that Debian goes into freeze in 3 months and likely AMD stack will be shitties of all, buggy and slow openource one and no pro driver. Beautiful, thank you AMD for providing new experiencesLast edited by dungeon; 30 July 2016, 05:38 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dungeon View PostFor what i do care is that Debian goes into freeze in 3 months and likely AMD stack will be shitties of all, buggy and slow openource one and no pro driver. Beautiful, thank you AMD for providing new experiences
OpenSUSE makes like one stable release per year (supported for a year and a half or so), and lets you upgrade from the older one to the newer one.
Comment
-
Well i use Sid mostly, so there is no problem on that side of things everything is recent there if i have new hardware i go there first... and i have no problem with current stable as Catalyst is there ... do you know that Catalyst is alive but for pro only, they update it couple days ago again:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/downloa...4#catalyst-proLast edited by dungeon; 30 July 2016, 06:26 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dungeon View PostWell i use Sid mostly, so there is no problem on that side of things everything is recent there if i have new hardware i go there first...
Hell is more likely to be frozen than Debian Sid.
AMD/Intel/whatever isn't targeting Debian specifically with open driver, so they don't care of their release schedules.
and i have no problem with current stable as Catalyst is there
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostThen I don't get why you are complaining about Debian feature freeze and stuff.
AMD/Intel/whatever isn't targeting Debian specifically with open driver, so they don't care of their release schedules.
I dunno if you undestand this llvm bug which infiltrate radeonsi too... that is like Mozilla release some Firefox version compiled with -O0 and say this is what everybody should use ... well, this is even worse then that, perf is indeed better then swrast but worse then -O0
Yeah, you were annoyed by the next stable in your previous post. "Debian will be frozen in 3 months" is not talking about Debian Jessie.Last edited by dungeon; 30 July 2016, 07:37 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dungeon View PostFirst time i hear that open driver targets something specificaly,
I dunno if you undestand this llvm bug which infiltrate radeonsi too...
That is current Stable, and i also talking about future so next Stable... that would be sort of like but bit newer or like between Ubuntu 16.10 and 17.04 extended
Comment
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostRepeating what I said above, driver developers have no obligation whatsoever to conform to Debian release schedules.Last edited by dungeon; 30 July 2016, 09:52 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dungeon View PostNo bridgman, right here we discuss why some people resist to file bugs... In mine example you and others can see that i have opened 3 of them with no result
- in one case a developer understood the bug, asked you to check whether a specific change fixed it, you confirmed, and now the only question is whether that fix should be backported from 4.0 to 3.9 or not (alternatives being 4.0 only or a 3.9.x point release) - I'm struggling a bit to understand the impact because sometimes you are saying it affects many games (implying a non-trivial subset) and sometimes you say it just affects ioquake games (which I would consider, perhaps wrongly, to be a smaller subset than "many")
- in the other case a developer sent you a patch, asked you if it fixed the problem, you said no then posted a couple of confusing comments, closed the bug when the developer expressed confusion (I still don't understand why), then reopened the bug after the developer had gone away
So far you seem to be two for two in the sense that both times developers responded, in the first case the patch was fixed (developer found a recent change that should fix it) and in the second case the developer started responding but was essentially chased away... and AFAICS the bug is still in such a confused state that nobody is likely to look at it. You could fix that; I would fix it if you would answer my questions with something non-sarcastic.Test signature
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by bridgman View Post- in one case a developer understood the bug, asked you to check whether a specific change fixed it, you confirmed, and now the only question is whether that fix should be backported from 4.0 to 3.9 or not ...
So after Superman closed that one, i take a lot (likely 3.9 Kg, but for sure not more) of spinach and closed two more And now on those 2 already closed bugs Bluto started to express confusion... i fully understand him, as there is no what to understand there, so i reopen all windows and doors for fresh air.
Now go and ask Superman why he does that, as he probably knows answers to all your questions... I must go now Wimpy, Olive is waitingLast edited by dungeon; 30 July 2016, 03:08 PM.
Comment
Comment