On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
>
> You shouldn't expect, by now, upgrade drm kernel without update libdrm
> or at least recompile libdrm.
Why?
Why shouldn't I expect that? I already outlined exactly _how_ it could be
done.
Why are people saying that technology has to suck?
> So when you saw a error message "driver nouveau 0.0.n+1 and have 0.0.n"
> is completely right.
No. It's _not_ right. The code knows what is wrong. Considering it a fatal
error is _stupid_ and bad technology, when it could have just fixed it.
> Is not a perfect world, but as talked on xorg mailing list, some time
> ago, we do not have resources to test it in all versions.
> Is better focus on just one combination.
This is not about "testing all versions". It's fine to have just one
combination. But why the hell doesn't it _load_ that one combination
instead of just dying?
IOW, there is a check for a version. It could - instead of dying - just
dlopen() the right version instead.
Why are people making excuses for bad programming and bad technology?
Linus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
