From: Michel <michdaen@ii...> - 2001-11-26 15:44:41
On Mon, 2001-11-26 at 15:59, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Michel D=E4nzer wrote:
> > On Mon, 2001-11-26 at 14:28, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > Log message:
> > > Put drm version back from 3.0 to 2.2; XFree86 4.1 is the baseline f=
> > > versioning information.
> > >
> > > Modified files:
> > > xc/xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/r128/:
> > > r128_xmesa.c
> > > xc/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/ati/:
> > > r128_dri.c
> > > xc/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/os-support/linux/drm/kernel/:
> > > r128_drv.c
> > >
> > > Revision Changes Path
> > > 1.25 +3 -3 xc/xc/lib/GL/mesa/src/drv/r128/r128_xmesa.=
> > > 1.27 +3 -3 xc/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/drivers/=
> > > 1.42 +2 -2 xc/xc/programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/os-suppo=
> > But you're aware that the major should have been bumped for 4.1 already=
> > It doesn't work with 4.0.x DRM and vice versa.
> Yes. That's life. What's important is compatibility of future versions =
> 4.1. 4.0 is a lost cause. Bumping the version number now doesn't make u=
> not doing it earlier, and even worse, we've promised not to bump the vers=
> numbers from the 4.1 base line without *extremely* good reason.
I hadn't looked at it that way, but it's of course very reasonable.
Thanks for explaining.
Earthling Michel D=E4nzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast