[Xorg] Re: X.Org DRI merge
eta at lclark.edu
Thu Jul 22 01:04:59 PDT 2004
On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 00:47, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 03:21, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > OK, so current DRI sources have been merged. Sorry for the CVS logs not
> > being clear on the mailing list, but what happened was that after I
> > noticed that the Mesa log was huge I went and turned off logging until
> > after the conflict resolution. Probably should have turned it back on
> > before conflict resolution. On a related note, I feel like CVSROOT
> > modifications should also go to the mailing list, so people can know,
> > "OK, anholt's playing around with big imports and things will have
> > changed." Any opposition to doing so?
> I'd rather also see huge logs. But that's just me.
I'm really mixed about that. It's somewhat nice for those of use with
nice connections, but I even now I'm not a fan of getting > 100K mails
for no reason. Most of that Mesa log is a bunch of uninformative "U"s.
However, that could be decreased significantly if I stopped doing
something bad in the Mesa import. Right now I just import a whole Mesa
tree, while the build doesn't need the progs, GLU, glut, etc. I should
figure out how to properly remove the existing files (cvs rm from the
vendor branch, I'm thinking), and add that list of files to remove to
the top of the Mesa tree so that it can be used in the importing
pseudo-script I've got. Doing that will be more of an improvement to
bandwidth/space usage than all the log avoidance we could ever do.
Eric Anholt eta at lclark.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~anholt/ anholt at FreeBSD.org
More information about the xorg