Summary: | =x11-drivers/xf86-video-xgi-1.6.0 [PPC] - xgi_accel.c:206: error: ‘CurrentColorDepth’ undeclared (first use in this function) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) <jer> |
Component: | [OLD] Library | Assignee: | Gentoo X packagers <x11> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | esigra, ppc |
Priority: | High | Keywords: | PMASKED |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | PPC | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | Removal due 2011-03-14 | ||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 344827 | ||
Attachments: |
x11-drivers:xf86-video-xgi-1.6.0:20101207-033327.log [ppc, fail]
x11-drivers:xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1:20101208-163455.log [ppc, fail] |
Description
Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED)
2010-12-07 03:40:42 UTC
Created attachment 256569 [details]
x11-drivers:xf86-video-xgi-1.6.0:20101207-033327.log [ppc, fail]
Does xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1 also fail? Possibly this was caused by http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/xf86-video-xgi/commit/?id=b03d7713bb2fcb7ab1da527aeb6111f7f36c11b7 Created attachment 256658 [details] x11-drivers:xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1:20101208-163455.log [ppc, fail] (In reply to comment #2) > Does xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1 also fail? In exactly the same way. (In reply to comment #3) > Created an attachment (id=256658) [details] > x11-drivers:xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1:20101208-163455.log [ppc, fail] > > (In reply to comment #2) > > Does xf86-video-xgi-1.5.1 also fail? > > In exactly the same way. I must add that I can't reproduce this on x86 - 1.6.0 builds fine. Indeed, the problematic code in xgi_accel.c is behind #if X_BYTE_ORDER == X_BIG_ENDIAN That was fixed by lu_zero for previous version. Is there any reason the patch was dropped? This needs to be commited upstream, not kept here as local patch... Update: upstream is mostly dead + the code is horrible horrible thing, so i am rather willing to lastrite this thing. Was the patch ever sent upstream? As there are still people who use this hardware and no alternative exists besides vesa, I would be inclined to keep it. Removed from the tree. |