Debian Bug report logs - #418889
ITP: nouveau -- an Open Source 3D drivers for nVidia cards

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: muzzle <muzzle@gmail.com>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: request to package nouveau, an Open Source 3D drivers for nVidia cards

Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:02:02 +0200

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist

--- Please enter the report below this line. ---

Nouveau (http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/) aims to be an Open
Source 3D drivers for nVidia cards.

According to the FAQ "2D works as well as nv driver from Xorg with a
few additional features. Some 3D acceleration is implemented, mostly
on NV40+ cards.", as such it would be a very interesting alternative
to the 2D-only nv driver and to the binary only nvidia driver.

The project has already attracted a lot of attention and many linux
distribution (such as Ubuntu and Fedora) already have plans to include
it in their next release.

The Nouveau developers insist often on the fact that nothing is in a
releasable state yet (at least from a user point of view) nonetheless
I would still advocate uploading Nouveau to experimental, to offer an
alternative to the existing drivers and to support the Nouveau project
effort.

Bye,

Emme

--- System information. ---
Architecture: i386
Kernel:       Linux 2.6.16-01

Debian Release: 4.0
 990 unstable        www.debian-multimedia.org
 990 unstable        mirror.phy.bnl.gov
 990 unstable        edevelop.org
 990 unstable        debian.fastweb.it
 990 unstable        debian.cilibrar.com
 700 experimental    debian.fastweb.it
 500 kernel-dists-sid kernel-archive.buildserver.net
 500 debian-unstable download.tuxfamily.org

--- Package information. ---
Depends       (Version) | Installed
=======================-+-===========
                       |



-- 
"Aspetto un'emozione sempre piu' indefinibile" (CCCP Fedeli alla linea)

Message #12 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org, muzzle <muzzle@gmail.com>

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: RFP: nouveau -- an Open Source 3D drivers for nVidia cards

Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:47:09 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

owner 418889 !
thanks

There are already packages for Ubuntu available in one of their personal
archives for testing. I've contacted the maintainer and we will be
working to get them uploaded to experimental. In the mean time you can
try the packages available here:

https://launchpad.net/~raof/+archive

Matt
-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #21 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Any upload to experimental pending?

Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 17:23:43 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Matthew!

Is there any upload to experimental pending for nouveau driver? It seems
pretty functional now.

Thanks.
-- 
panic("CPU too expensive - making holiday in the ANDES!");
	2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #26 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Any upload to experimental pending?

Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 22:34:02 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat May 10 17:23, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> Hi Matthew!
> 
> Is there any upload to experimental pending for nouveau driver? It seems
> pretty functional now.

Not from me, I'm afraid I've never had quite enough time to do so. I was
talking to the person who has packaged it in ubuntu, but he thought
there would need to be some things done with the XSF to make it work.

If it's in an easier to integrate state I can have another look at it

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #31 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>

To: debian-x@lists.debian.org

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 17:20:56 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

OoO Vers la fin de l'après-midi  du dimanche 11 mai 2008, vers 16:42, je
disais:

>>> nouveau  needs  an up-to-date  mesa  (7.3.0)  that  we already  have  in
>>> Debian. It  also needs an up-to-date  libdrm (current git,  2.3.0 is not
>>> ok) that we don't have in Debian. Moreover, from libdrm, we should build
>>> "nouveau-kernel-source".  And at least,  there is  the driver  part that
>>> should be built and it seems quite easy.

>> I'm not sure mesa 7.0.3 will be enough.  You might need a snapshot of
>> master instead.

> You are right. Current git snapshot need more recent libdrm.

To summarize,  to push xserver-xorg-video-nouveau  into experimental, we
need:
 - libdrm git snapshot
 - mesa git snapshot

Moreover, libdrm git snapshot will generate a module source package that
will generate nouveau.ko and drm.ko. The latest one is incompatible with
the one in current Debian kernel (2.6.25) and will override it.

At  least, they  need to  be kept  in  sync as  long as  nouveau is  not
releasing. This seems a bit too much even for experimental. Maybe things
will get settled when a new libdrm will be released.
-- 
BOFH excuse #151:
Some one needed the powerstrip, so they pulled the switch plug.

[Message part 2 (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #36 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: debian-x@lists.debian.org, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 17:29:23 +0200

On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 17:20:56 +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:

> To summarize,  to push xserver-xorg-video-nouveau  into experimental, we
> need:
>  - libdrm git snapshot

drm. not just libdrm.

>  - mesa git snapshot
> 
> Moreover, libdrm git snapshot will generate a module source package that
> will generate nouveau.ko and drm.ko. The latest one is incompatible with
> the one in current Debian kernel (2.6.25) and will override it.
> 
> At  least, they  need to  be kept  in  sync as  long as  nouveau is  not
> releasing. This seems a bit too much even for experimental. Maybe things
> will get settled when a new libdrm will be released.

I think it's fine for experimental, as long as the packager is aware
that it'll need quite some work to keep all the bits together, not just
the initial packaging.
I don't expect things to settle down this year, FWIW.

Cheers,
Julien

Message #41 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Christopher James Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Nouveau packaging

Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:15:16 +1000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

I'm RAOF, maintainer of the Ubuntu PPA mentioned earlier.  I've recently
changed the libdrm package in my PPA to produce a module-assistant using
drm-modules-source package, which might make inclusion in experimental a
bit easier.

Speaking with upstream, they very much do not want the 3d portion
shipped at all, anywhere.  It doesn't just need a git snapshot of mesa,
it needs a git snapshot of a branch of the experimental gallium-0.1
branch of mesa.  Accordingly, I don't ship the 3d portion in my PPA, and
it would be courteous to not ship it in experimental.

I'd be happy to help push to experimental, but I don't currently have a
bare-metal Sid install, so driver testing is a little difficult!

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #46 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, debian-x@lists.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 01:03:42 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

I am currently using Christopher Rogers (roaf) nouveau packages from his
Ubuntu PPA recompiled against sid.

I'm would definately like to see these in experimental - it would certainly
ween a large number of my friends from the non-free NVIDIA driver. More
importantly, I'm willing to help out to make this happen.

So what is the next steps? I assume we would want to package under the XSF,
so the next things to do might be:

 * Create /git/pkg-xorg/driver/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau.git
 * Create /git/pkg-xorg/lib/libdrm-snapshot.git
 * Join XSF so we can commit to these (hello all!)


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #51 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 07:54:29 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Chris Lamb wrote:

> I'm would definately like to see these in experimental - it would certainly
> ween a large number of my friends from the non-free NVIDIA driver. More
> importantly, I'm willing to help out to make this happen.
> 
> So what is the next steps? 

I have prepared some packages for upload which introduce binary packages
with a libdrm-snapshot{2,-dev,-dbg} naming scheme (the libdrm source package
already uses experimental for its 2.3.0-branch releases). I have been
testing them on my desktop for a few days now with no Debian-specific issues.

All that is missing is a quick copyright check (which I will do later today)
and I will upload somewhere public.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #56 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 09:53:46 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri May 30 07:54, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Chris Lamb wrote:
> 
> > I'm would definately like to see these in experimental - it would certainly
> > ween a large number of my friends from the non-free NVIDIA driver. More
> > importantly, I'm willing to help out to make this happen.
> > 
> > So what is the next steps? 
> 
> I have prepared some packages for upload which introduce binary packages
> with a libdrm-snapshot{2,-dev,-dbg} naming scheme (the libdrm source package
> already uses experimental for its 2.3.0-branch releases). I have been
> testing them on my desktop for a few days now with no Debian-specific issues.
> 
> All that is missing is a quick copyright check (which I will do later today)
> and I will upload somewhere public.

Excellent. I shall have time tonight or over the weekend to review and
upload these, although I will touch base with the XSF before doing so.

Thanks,
Matt


--
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #61 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 00:03:54 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> Excellent. I shall have time tonight or over the weekend to review and
> upload these, although I will touch base with the XSF before doing so.

Sorry about the short delay.. here we go:

 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/libdrm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080530%2b6e8a2cf-1.dsc
 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080526%2be034616-1.dsc

These are almost certainly not 100% ready-for-upload. I can think of three
issues/topics currently:

 * Relationship with libdrm package -- I've gone with creating seperately
   named binary packages in the style of libdrm-snapshot{2,-dev}, etc., for
   reasons discussed on the debian-x list.

   However, I seem to have been misinformed about how the
   Replaces/Conflicts/Provides trick works (or am doing something silly) as
   my attempts to construct a package that can replace the libdrm2 package
   whilst still providing it were unsuccessful - attempting to install the
   resulting package kept trying to remove X.Org. (Currently, each package
   currently just "Replaces:" its non-snapshot counterpart.)

 * The Build-Depends for xserver-xorg-video-nouveau currently contains:

      Build-Depends: [...], libdrm-snapshot-dev, [...]

   Should this (and/or the linux-nouveau-modules binary dependency) be
   versioned to ensure that the X driver and kernel module do not get
   horribly out of sync? I would not like to annoy upstream with
   unreproducable issues resulting from disparate versions (even if they do
   compile).

 * Maintainer/Uploaders field -- this is currently just set to me, *purely*
   to keep Lintian happy and to force discussion. If the package is to
   maintained in the XSF, this should probably change to:

     Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <debian-x@lists.debian.org>
     Uploaders: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, $ME


Looking forward to hearing your comments, etc.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #66 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 21:12:32 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat May 31 00:03, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Matthew Johnson wrote:
> 
> > Excellent. I shall have time tonight or over the weekend to review and
> > upload these, although I will touch base with the XSF before doing so.
> 
> Sorry about the short delay.. here we go:

Cool

> These are almost certainly not 100% ready-for-upload. I can think of three
> issues/topics currently:
> 
>  * Relationship with libdrm package -- I've gone with creating seperately
>    named binary packages in the style of libdrm-snapshot{2,-dev}, etc., for
>    reasons discussed on the debian-x list.

Yup, I agree with this.

>    However, I seem to have been misinformed about how the
>    Replaces/Conflicts/Provides trick works (or am doing something silly) as
>    my attempts to construct a package that can replace the libdrm2 package
>    whilst still providing it were unsuccessful - attempting to install the
>    resulting package kept trying to remove X.Org. (Currently, each package
>    currently just "Replaces:" its non-snapshot counterpart.)

I believe you need all three. Conflicts causes the other one to be
removed, Provides causes dependencies on all the others to be satisfied.

>  * The Build-Depends for xserver-xorg-video-nouveau currently contains:
> 
>       Build-Depends: [...], libdrm-snapshot-dev, [...]
> 
>    Should this (and/or the linux-nouveau-modules binary dependency) be
>    versioned to ensure that the X driver and kernel module do not get
>    horribly out of sync? I would not like to annoy upstream with
>    unreproducable issues resulting from disparate versions (even if they do
>    compile).

I agree

>  * Maintainer/Uploaders field -- this is currently just set to me, *purely*
>    to keep Lintian happy and to force discussion. If the package is to
>    maintained in the XSF, this should probably change to:
> 
>      Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <debian-x@lists.debian.org>
>      Uploaders: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, $ME

At the very least it should be maintained in a shared VCS and I should
be added as an uploader.

I can't see anything else obvious, I shall email debian-x and ask
whether it should be maintained in the XSF repositories.

Matt

--
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #71 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: debian-x@lists.debian.org

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Nouveau packaging

Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 21:19:55 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Dear X maintainers,

I'm considering uploading packages for the Nouveau drivers to
experimental. The summary of the discussion is attached to bug #418889.
The packages were adapted by Chris Lamb from Christopher Rogers' Ubuntu
PPA packages.

The current packages are at:

 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/libdrm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080530%2b6e8a2cf-1.dsc
 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080526%2be034616-1.dsc

They need Replaces/Conflits/Provides fixing.

Would you like this maintained as part of the XSF and do you have any
other comments before I upload them?

Thanks,

Matt
--
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #76 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

Cc: debian-x@lists.debian.org, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Nouveau packaging

Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 22:59:22 +0200

On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 21:19:55 +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote:

> Dear X maintainers,
> 
> I'm considering uploading packages for the Nouveau drivers to
> experimental. The summary of the discussion is attached to bug #418889.
> The packages were adapted by Chris Lamb from Christopher Rogers' Ubuntu
> PPA packages.
> 
Thanks for this work.  I haven't looked into the packages at all, so
here are just quick comments.

> The current packages are at:
> 
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/libdrm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080530%2b6e8a2cf-1.dsc
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080526%2be034616-1.dsc
> 
I'd rename the drm package to just 'drm-snapshot', since you provide the
kernel modules as well as the lib.
It seems there's a problem with libdrm, though, if you provide
libdrm.so.2 you'll have to conflict with the libdrm2 package from
unstable, and then the driver won't be installable together with the x
server?  If someone can check that the only symbols missing from the
snapshot version of the lib are TTM-related, maybe it'd be better to
just call it libdrm2? (I know I've said the opposite before, but I
thought the removed symbols were being used.)

The nouveau package description needs to be fixed to not refer to it as
an X.Org driver, too, and point to nouveau.freedesktop.org instead of
xorg.freedesktop.org.

> They need Replaces/Conflits/Provides fixing.
> 
> Would you like this maintained as part of the XSF and do you have any
> other comments before I upload them?
> 
Whatever you prefer is fine by me.

Cheers,
Julien

Message #81 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 04:10:02 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Matthew,

> I can't see anything else obvious, I shall email debian-x and ask
> whether it should be maintained in the XSF repositories.

Excellent; I saw your post and have incorporated the following changes:

 * Rename source package libdrm-snapshot => drm-snapshot.
 * Remove X.Org "endorsements" from xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package
   description.

So as I see it, the two issues that remain are:

 1. libdrm shared-object binary name
 ===================================

> >    However, I seem to have been misinformed about how the
> >    Replaces/Conflicts/Provides trick works (or am doing something silly)
> > as my attempts to construct a package that can replace the libdrm2
> > package whilst still providing it were unsuccessful - attempting to
> > install the resulting package kept trying to remove X.Org. (Currently,
> > each package currently just "Replaces:" its non-snapshot counterpart.)
> 
> I believe you need all three. Conflicts causes the other one to be
> removed, Provides causes dependencies on all the others to be satisfied.

Hm, I tried again.. When using all three, ie.:

 Package: libdrm-snapshot2
 [...]
 Replaces: libdrm2 (<< 2.3.1~git+20080530+6e8a2cf-1)
 Conflicts: libdrm2 (<< 2.3.1~git+20080530+6e8a2cf-1)
 Provides: libdrm2

.. and testing the upgrade from unstable's libdrm2, I get:

   http://chris-lamb.co.uk/b/libdrm-snapshot-dpkg.txt

Using --auto-deconfigure does not help, and nor does placing the files in a
repository. Are we certain that Replaces/Conflicts/Provides works with
non-virtual packages?

Julien's reply to your debian-x mail suggested:

> if you provide libdrm.so.2 you'll have to conflict with the libdrm2
> package from unstable, and then the driver won't be installable together
> with the x server?  If someone can check that the only symbols missing
> from the snapshot version of the lib are TTM-related, maybe it'd be better
> to just call it libdrm2? (I know I've said the opposite before, but I
> thought the removed symbols were being used.)

Hm, what do you think? The snapshot packages would never be in unstable so
there is not a namespace conflict, but it would rob the existing libdrm
source package of control over experimental. However, according to Julien
on IRC, libdrm in experimental was only used for very new versions rather
than to test transitions, etc.

(On the other hand, having a completely different package name gives a nice
seperation; no accidental installations of the bleeding-edge code.)

 2. Maintainer/Uploaders field
 =============================

> At the very least it should be maintained in a shared VCS and I should
> be added as an uploader.

Agree 100%. As the owner of the ITP, I defer this decision to you. I am
perfectly happy with it being in the XSF repositories, but I do not have
commit access there. Do you happen to know the procedure for joining?

For completeness, I have updated the packages:

 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080530%2b6e8a2cf-1.dsc
 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080601%2be034616-1.dsc


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #86 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Packaging nouveau

Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 14:36:14 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sun Jun 01 04:10, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
> 
> > I can't see anything else obvious, I shall email debian-x and ask
> > whether it should be maintained in the XSF repositories.
> 
> Excellent; I saw your post and have incorporated the following changes:
> 
>  * Rename source package libdrm-snapshot => drm-snapshot.
>  * Remove X.Org "endorsements" from xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package
>    description.
> 
> So as I see it, the two issues that remain are:

I had a conversation about this with jcristau on IRC:

21:56 -!- Irssi: Starting query in oftc with jcristau
21:56 <jcristau> hi
21:57 <jcristau> one question about the nouveau packages, how do you get your libdrm-snapshot coinstallable with libdrm2?
21:57 <mjj29> hi
21:57 <mjj29> you don't
21:57 <mjj29> I believe
21:57 <mjj29> hence the conflicts/replaces/provides
21:58 <jcristau> then you have a problem
21:58 <jcristau> because the x server depends on libdrm2
21:58 <jcristau> i'll reply to the mail
21:58 <mjj29> libdrm-snapshot should provide libdrm2
21:58 <jcristau> that won't help
21:58 <mjj29> (it doesn't yet)
21:59 <mjj29> because it's versionned?
21:59 <jcristau> yes
21:59 <mjj29> ah, I was wondering if that would be a problem
21:59 <mjj29> so, either it needs to be coinstallable, or it just needs to be libdrm2?
21:59 <mjj29> would you be happy with the latter solution?
21:59 <jcristau> yes, see my mail
22:00 <jcristau> it needs checking that the removed symbols aren't used by anything
22:00 <mjj29> cool
22:00 <mjj29> we will probably do that then
22:03 <jcristau> is there a plan to package a mesa snapshot for the dri driver too at some point?
22:03 <mjj29> that's for the 3D stuff?
22:03 <jcristau> yes
22:04 <mjj29> upstream don't want 3D to be packaged anywhere yet
22:04 <jcristau> ok
22:04 <mjj29> even in exp.
22:04 <jcristau> fair enough
22:06 <jcristau> feel free to ask on the list or #debian-x if you need anything from us
22:06 <mjj29> sure
22:07 <jcristau> oh, and i forgot: your xsfbs copy could be updated :)
22:07 <mjj29> ah, thanks

So, in summary we want to use libdrm2. Have you looked at the removed
symbols thing?
 
>  2. Maintainer/Uploaders field
>  =============================
> 
> > At the very least it should be maintained in a shared VCS and I should
> > be added as an uploader.
> 
> Agree 100%. As the owner of the ITP, I defer this decision to you. I am
> perfectly happy with it being in the XSF repositories, but I do not have
> commit access there. Do you happen to know the procedure for joining?

I don't, I'm not a member. I'm happy just to have commit access to a
repository on alioth or somewhere else. We could possible coordinate
with RAOF and have different branches in the same repository or
something. If you want to just setup something, I'll go with whatever.

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #91 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Christopher Halse Rogers" <chalserogers@gmail.com>

To: "Matthew Johnson" <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: "Chris Lamb" <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 10:59:19 +1000

On 6/1/08, Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org> wrote:
> On Sun Jun 01 04:10, Chris Lamb wrote:
...snip...
>
>  >  2. Maintainer/Uploaders field
>  >  =============================
>  >
>  > > At the very least it should be maintained in a shared VCS and I should
>  > > be added as an uploader.
>  >
>  > Agree 100%. As the owner of the ITP, I defer this decision to you. I am
>  > perfectly happy with it being in the XSF repositories, but I do not have
>  > commit access there. Do you happen to know the procedure for joining?
>
>
> I don't, I'm not a member. I'm happy just to have commit access to a
>  repository on alioth or somewhere else. We could possible coordinate
>  with RAOF and have different branches in the same repository or
>  something. If you want to just setup something, I'll go with whatever.

Hi!  I have been tracking this somewhat.  I've now got a bare-metal
Sid install, so I can reasonably expect to be able to help a bit,
either in XSF or on alioth or where ever.  It seems reasonable to do
this in XSF, but I'm not a member of it either, so just a repository
on alioth may be more convenient.

Message #96 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: "Christopher Halse Rogers" <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Cc: "Matthew Johnson" <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 03:37:43 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello Matt and ROAF,

> So, in summary we want to use libdrm2. Have you looked at the removed
> symbols thing?

I've looked and as far as I can see the symbols seem okay, but would
appreciate if someone else could confirm. The packages linked below now
generate a libdrm2 package accordingly and I've tested the upgrade and
downgrade to the unstable version with no obvious problems.

> >  2. Maintainer/Uploaders field
> If you want to just setup something, I'll go with whatever.

Christopher Halse Rogers wrote:
> It seems reasonable to do this in XSF, but I'm not a member of it either,
> so just a repository on alioth may be more convenient.

Okay, so it seems that none of us are members! However, for a number of
reasons I think we should go ahead and join the XSF and host the packaging
there. (If there is some reason why we can't join then we will obviously
have to reevaluate this.) Not sure how the Ubuntu PPA stuff works, but I'm
sure a branch for ROAF's Ubuntu stuff would be very welcome if it would help.

I've uploaded updated packages here:

 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080602%2bac4da86-1.dsc
 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080602%2be034616-1.dsc 

I believe these are Ready For Upload; we can get the packaging hosted
somewhere whilst they pause in NEW.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #101 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: "Christopher Halse Rogers" <chalserogers@gmail.com>

To: "Chris Lamb" <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: "Matthew Johnson" <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 21:40:22 +1000

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:37 PM, Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk> wrote:
> Hello Matt and ROAF,
>
>> So, in summary we want to use libdrm2. Have you looked at the removed
>> symbols thing?
>
> I've looked and as far as I can see the symbols seem okay, but would
> appreciate if someone else could confirm. The packages linked below now
> generate a libdrm2 package accordingly and I've tested the upgrade and
> downgrade to the unstable version with no obvious problems.
>
>> >  2. Maintainer/Uploaders field
>> If you want to just setup something, I'll go with whatever.
>
> Christopher Halse Rogers wrote:
>> It seems reasonable to do this in XSF, but I'm not a member of it either,
>> so just a repository on alioth may be more convenient.
>
> Okay, so it seems that none of us are members! However, for a number of
> reasons I think we should go ahead and join the XSF and host the packaging
> there. (If there is some reason why we can't join then we will obviously
> have to reevaluate this.) Not sure how the Ubuntu PPA stuff works, but I'm
> sure a branch for ROAF's Ubuntu stuff would be very welcome if it would help.
>
> I've uploaded updated packages here:
>
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080602%2bac4da86-1.dsc
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080602%2be034616-1.dsc
>
> I believe these are Ready For Upload; we can get the packaging hosted
> somewhere whilst they pause in NEW.

Not quite; I've just built them, and you need to update the Source
line in debian/control.modules.in to drm-snapshot from
libdrm-snapshot.  Otherwise the drm-modules-source package fails to
build with module-assistant.

It might also be good to not ship the full .git archive in the
.orig.tar.gz; that'd shrink it by ~10Mb, and we only really need the
git revision signature which we could generate at get-orig-source
time.  I believe the same can be done with the
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package, but the space/bandwidth saving is
substantially less.  This might be less interesting if the package is
going into XSF git, or if it'll be using the 3.0 git source package
version that I've seen mentioned.  Maybe we don't need to care.

Message #106 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: "Christopher Halse Rogers" <chalserogers@gmail.com>, "Matthew Johnson" <mjj29@debian.org>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:38:21 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Christopher Halse Rogers wrote:

> > I believe these are Ready For Upload; we can get the packaging hosted
> > somewhere whilst they pause in NEW.
> 
> Not quite; I've just built them, and you need to update the Source
> line in debian/control.modules.in to drm-snapshot from
> libdrm-snapshot.

D'oh, good catch. :)
 
> It might also be good to not ship the full .git archive in the
> .orig.tar.gz; that'd shrink it by ~10Mb, [..] Maybe we don't need to care.

Yeah, I don't think we would need to do this once we have the packages in
XSF, unless it would make it easier for your Ubuntu stuff? 

I forgot to close this ITP bug in xserver-xorg-video-nouveau's changelog; so
I have updated both packages. They are both at the same URL.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #111 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>, 418889@bugs.debian.org, debian-x@lists.debian.org, control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 21:57:44 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

tag 418889 pending
thanks

On Mon Jun 02 14:38, Chris Lamb wrote:
> I forgot to close this ITP bug in xserver-xorg-video-nouveau's changelog; so
> I have updated both packages. They are both at the same URL.
> 

I have uploaded the packages. Next thing to do is install the packaging
in the XSF repository, I suppose.

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #118 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

Cc: Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:06:30 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> I have uploaded the packages. Next thing to do is install the packaging
> in the XSF repository, I suppose.

Great, thanks! I'm halfway to finishing off the repositories to follow the
XSF style. Will post again when I've pushed them (unless someone beats me to
it).


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #123 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

Cc: Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 06:47:25 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> I have uploaded the packages. Next thing to do is install the packaging
> in the XSF repository, I suppose.

Done:

 ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/lib/drm-snapshot
 ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/driver/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau

(or)

 git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/lib/drm-snapshot
 git://git.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/driver/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau

They should appear on Gitweb in a few hours. Let me know if I've done
anything silly; I'm not used to this particular Git workflow.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #128 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 08:33:24 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Fri Jun 06 06:47, Chris Lamb wrote:

>  ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/lib/drm-snapshot
>  ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/driver/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau

I prefer git+ssh://....

> They should appear on Gitweb in a few hours. Let me know if I've done
> anything silly; I'm not used to this particular Git workflow.

I get some odd errors:

after git clone it prints:

   Warning: Remote HEAD refers to nonexistent ref, unable to checkout.

and doesn't checkout a head.

I then have to do: 

   git checkout xserver-xorg-video-nouveau-0.0.10-git+20080602+e034616-1

to get a checkout.

git checkout -b master creates a new branch correctly named, I think if
someone commits to that it will DTRT, but I could be wrong.

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #133 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>, 418889@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#418889: Packaging nouveau

Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 12:58:58 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Matthew Johnson wrote:

> On Fri Jun 06 06:47, Chris Lamb wrote:
> 
> >  ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/lib/drm-snapshot
> >  ssh://username@alioth.debian.org/git/pkg-xorg/driver/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
> 
> I prefer git+ssh://....

As a URI or a protocol? (I thought they were synonyms.)

> after git clone it prints:
> 
>    Warning: Remote HEAD refers to nonexistent ref, unable to checkout.

Fixed.

> git checkout -b master creates a new branch correctly named, I think if
> someone commits to that it will DTRT, but I could be wrong.

You were quite correct.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #138 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Subject: Fw: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080602+e034616-1_i386.changes REJECTED

Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 02:26:15 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Joerg Jaspert wrote:

> rejected, there is a license issue to clarify before this can enter
> main. The files nv_cursor.c, nv_setup.c, nv_local.h, nv_hw.c, nv_exa.c,
> nv_dac.c and nv_dac.c contain a license header that is not DFSG free (only
> allows use, but no redistribution, modification, etc). Probably just an
> oversight on upstreams (well, nvidias) side, but still nothing we can ship.

D'oh. I've filed this upstream as:

 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16366

Lets see what happens.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #143 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Subject: Fw: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080602+e034616-1_i386.changes REJECTED

Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 01:54:07 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Joerg Jaspert wrote:

> rejected, there is a license issue to clarify before this can enter
> main.

This is now sorted upstream. I have placed updated packages at:

 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080702%2b48c2116-1.dsc
 http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080703%2b301d984-1.dsc

They fix a few other things, including a missing binary dependency on quilt
(#487260). I am using these right now, and have tested the migration from
the non-free nvidia driver.


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #148 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: Fw: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080602+e034616-1_i386.change s REJECTED

Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:37:50 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Thu Jul 03 01:54, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> 
> > rejected, there is a license issue to clarify before this can enter
> > main.
> 
> This is now sorted upstream. I have placed updated packages at:
> 
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080702%2b48c2116-1.dsc
>  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1~git%2b20080703%2b301d984-1.dsc
> 
> They fix a few other things, including a missing binary dependency on quilt
> (#487260). I am using these right now, and have tested the migration from
> the non-free nvidia driver.
> 
Uploaded

Matt

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #153 received at 418889-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889-close@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Bug#418889: fixed in xserver-xorg-video-nouveau 1:0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1

Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 18:24:44 +0000

Source: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
Source-Version: 1:0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1

We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive:

xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
  to pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.dsc
  to pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.dsc
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.deb
  to pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.deb
xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116.orig.tar.gz
  to pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116.orig.tar.gz



A summary of the changes between this version and the previous one is
attached.

Thank you for reporting the bug, which will now be closed.  If you
have further comments please address them to 418889@bugs.debian.org,
and the maintainer will reopen the bug report if appropriate.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk> (supplier of updated xserver-xorg-video-nouveau package)

(This message was generated automatically at their request; if you
believe that there is a problem with it please contact the archive
administrators by mailing ftpmaster@debian.org)


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:35:47 +0100
Source: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
Binary: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1:0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <debian-x@lists.debian.org>
Changed-By: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>
Description: 
 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau - X.Org X server -- Nouveau display driver (experimental)
Closes: 418889 
Changes: 
 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau (1:0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1) experimental; urgency=low
 .
   * Re-upload latest snapshot fixed copyright in various upstream files
     after REJECT. (Closes: #418889)
      - 48c2116f... NV50_KMS: no int10 please
      - 11102af2... Backport console font save/restore from nouveau_ms
      - ca2c55df... randr12: fix mode detection for when screen size changes
      - 9c6eb667... NV04-NV4E: Save and restore FB_START
      - 82fe9a21... NV50_KMS: switch to output dpms
      - 13ce1f4c... Properly close drm when exiting + misc cleanup.
      - 7cb0eed6... Fixup and add some license statements.
      - 27c7c884... change hack to work with latest drm changes..
      - 99a4b686... NV50: unbreak kms and implement a basic off mode/dpms
      - 1a23dbd1... nv50: stub out NV50SorSetClockMode for LVDS, it doesn't work
        there
      - 2ccc80bd... nv50: bring in int10-constole-restore hack from nv driver
      - 73b4fcc2... fix non-kms build/run
      - 75d8947d... NV50: Some basic code to get kernel modesetting going.
      - df52dc46... No need for G80+ LVDS conf bits reports
      - 1813559a... More DCB 1.5 TV variants (#16252 and #16342)
      - 29c4a58b... Be a little more discerning about the BIT bios signature
      - e8c79072... LVDS_INIT should not always use head A
      - fc137f23... NV50: lvds is probably still broken, but it's a step in the
        right direction
   * Add Vcs-Git and Vcs-Browser fields to debian/control
   * Bump Standards-Version to 3.8.0 (no changes).
 .
 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau (1:0.0.10~git+20080602+e034616-1) experimental; urgency=low
 .
   * First upload to Debian experimental based on Christopher James Halse
     Rogers's packages for Ubuntu (Closes: #418889)
   * debian/control:
     - Set Maintainer to Debian X Strike Force, add Matthew Johnson and myself
       to Uploaders.
     - Bump Standards-Version to 3.7.3
     - Add Homepage: field
   * debian/rules:
     - Misc. cosmetic changes
   * Update debian/xsfbs/xsfbs.{mk,sh}
   * Update debian/copyright.
Checksums-Sha1: 
 2042bb2a358373bdcda78c4202f6bda1b7b67543 1872 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.dsc
 49ced9f8e0fe7e9b31f7a3b8c3d92d9fceb1ba3f 3064275 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116.orig.tar.gz
 e2038f2776458304d3ca56e94707e514629b84fa 27734 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
 dd77ede7e6f7988f5aa2bcb2bc60e8498a3462bd 153796 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.deb
Checksums-Sha256: 
 0f85a3326fe781035a44e5d05970e9a8badcde15d26d8778b76964d81185fbc6 1872 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.dsc
 37ead81cc5b1f35f00b3b9aa9db48f6e9f078fb7592163a68ddf21a120870394 3064275 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116.orig.tar.gz
 832fe7961c7c3675241955cf4c9efae26c6fd3519f8733b52253d6f9ef76ca85 27734 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
 8f8e4f8ac88ef2c7096424ee4a1fdd876e352bcb008c6335dcbb5801e33db380 153796 xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.deb
Files: 
 fd1f0a615e6833535578a15619cee846 1872 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.dsc
 8ed0313dd1f835eb0dc56d5a56fa2135 3064275 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116.orig.tar.gz
 9bc75ac3a7989f8fb20fb54a78b1584e 27734 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
 44bb40212d8037bf45672ea2449d1896 153796 x11 optional xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.deb

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIbI96pldmHVvob7kRAlfsAKDMkwbd9T7zhtbht6ncE8VcwzvzYgCfTsmd
VZj5YqCyAPr0BPpqh/RTRPo=
=ZXZ6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Message #158 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

To: 418889@bugs.debian.org

Cc: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.changes ACCEPTED

Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 21:29:06 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Debian Installer wrote:

> Accepted:
> xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1.diff.gz
> [..]

Hurrah, second time lucky. :)

However, it's not useful yet as our drm-snapshot version is lower than
drm's (pointed out by jcristau): we also need to upload xorg-video-nouveau
as this depends on a specific version of drm-shapshot.

I have thus prepared new versions of the packages with correct versioning
using new upstream snapshots:

  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1%2bgit%2b20080706%2b401f77a-1.dsc
  http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080706%2bb1f3169-1.dsc

Matthew, could you upload these? :)


Regards,

-- 
Chris Lamb, UK                                       chris@chris-lamb.co.uk
                                                            GPG: 0x634F9A20

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #163 received at 418889@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>

To: Chris Lamb <chris@chris-lamb.co.uk>

Cc: 418889@bugs.debian.org, Matthew Johnson <mjj29@debian.org>, Christopher Halse Rogers <chalserogers@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git+20080702+48c2116-1_i386.change s ACCEPTED

Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 23:21:31 +0100

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sun Jul 06 21:29, Chris Lamb wrote:
> I have thus prepared new versions of the packages with correct versioning
> using new upstream snapshots:
> 
>   http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/drm-snapshot_2.3.1%2bgit%2b20080706%2b401f77a-1.dsc
>   http://chris-lamb.co.uk/debian/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.10~git%2b20080706%2bb1f3169-1.dsc
> 

Uploading as we speak

M

-- 
Matthew Johnson

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.