Fwd: [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

Would it be possible to pull in and package xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
updates more frequently in Fedora?

These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.

-Ilyes

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Chris Wilson <chris(a)chris-wilson.co.uk&gt;
Date: Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16
To: xorg-announce(a)lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: intel-gfx(a)lists.freedesktop.org, xorg(a)lists.freedesktop.org


Rejoice! We have found a trick to make 830gm/845g stable at long last.
Ever since the switch to GEM and dynamic video memory, those early
second generation chipsets have been plagued by instability. The lack of
flushing cachelines from the CPU to GMCH was eventually solved by using
an undocmented bit, but 830/845 were still hanging under memory pressure.
These deaths were all due to garbage finding its way into the command
streamer, and they go away if we take a leaf out of the original driver
and never reuse those pages for anything else. So for the first time
ever, I have been able to complete running the test suite on an 845g,
even whilst thrashing the page and buffer caches!
-Chris

 * Run the SF stage as single-threaded on gen4 to workaround a few issues
   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57410

 * Keep the scanout SURFACE_STATE separate to avoid overriding its
   memory access control on gen6/7 (i.e. writes to the scanout need to
   be kept out of the render cache)

 * Tune batch flushing after an operation to an exported surface under a
   compositor.

 * Make sure the source is on the CPU for inplace composition of trapezoids
   using the CPU
   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56825

 * Immediately flush in the block hander after a split batch to reduce
   latency between the two halves of an operation.
   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51718

 * Install a fallback config if we fail to install the desired config
   at VT switch (i.e. booting, after resume with 3 incompatible pipes on
   Ivybridge)

 * Pin batches to avoid CS incoherence on 830/845
   https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26345

Chris Wilson (53):
      sna: Tidy addition of fake GTF modes for panels
      sna/gen4: Avoid emitting URB_FENCE across a cache-line
      sna/gen4: Remove unused CC viewport
      sna/gen4: Special case solids through the general vertex emitter
      sna/gen4: Workaround render corruption with multiple SF threads
      sna/gen6+: Cache the scanout targets separately to avoid override PTE
caching
      sna: Assume that future hardware only gets more flexible
      sna: Don't disable CPU bo if supported on unknown hw
      Refactor the common probe methods for scrn construction
      sna/gen4+: Add common glyph-to-dst emitters
      Fix compilation of UMS probe following 13f47008ec
      Remove the default log message
      sna: Mark proxies as dirty on first relocation
      sna: Only flush at the low apeture watermark if idle
      sna: Only flush before adding fresh surfaces to the batch
      sna: Only inspect the target ring for busyness
      sna: Convert the ring from BLT/3D to the internal index for
kgem_ring_is_idle()
      sna: Flush upon change of target if GPU is idle
      sna: Replace remaining kgem_is_idle() with kgem_ring_is_idle()
      sna/gen4+: Refine test for preferring GPU spans
      sna: Move source to CPU prior to referencing for inplace trapezoids
      sna/sprite: Add a DBG to report whether the kernel supports sprites
      sna: Immediately flush a split batch
      sna: Compromise and only flush a split batch if writing to scanout
      sna: Avoid reusing the same 'busy' bit for two different meanings.
      sna: Try installing a fallback config on VT enter in case full
desiredMode fails
      sna/dri: Only special case 'divisor && msc-passed' for immediate
flipping
      sna/dri: Disable name exchanges for SwapBuffers
      sna/dri: Query current msc before use
      sna/dri: Fix handling of current_msc > target_msc
      sna/gen4: Use the single-threaded SF w/a for spans as well
      sna/gen3+: Use nearest for unscaled videos
      sna/gen2: STIPPLE requires an argument
      sna: Pin some batches to avoid CS incoherence on 830/845
      sna: Fix the error path in kgem_init_pinned_batches() to use the
right iter
      sna: Improve the initialisation failure path for pinned batches
      sna: Only flush the batch after an actual relocation
      sna: Fix typo for 830/845 gen
      sna: Fix up BLT overwrite detection to use target_handle
      sna/gen2: Align surface sizes to an even tile
      sna/gen2: Program solid mask using the DIFFUSE component
      sna/gen3: Remove incorrect optimisation of an opaque source for CA
      sna/gen2: Assertions
      sna/gen2: Initialise channel->is_affine for solid
      sna/gen2: Reorder reuse_source() to avoid NULL dereference for solids
      sna/gen3: Remove stray setting of vertex_start
      sna/gen3: Don't combine primitives if beginning a ca 2-pass
      sna/gen2+: Experiment with not forcing migration to GPU after CPU
rasterisation
      sna: Reduce fence watermarks
      sna/dri: Store and check size of front/back bo attached to a DRI2
drawable
      sna/dri: Honour TripleBuffer Option
      sna/dri: Fallback to a blit after a failed flip
      2.20.16 release

Jesse Barnes (1):
      dri2: don't schedule a flip prematurely at ScheduleSwap time

git tag: 2.20.16

http://xorg.freedesktop.org/archive/individual/driver/xf86-video-intel-2....
MD5:  bff3599b51e44c43c4213cb8d04fa13d  xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2
SHA1: 70f8aba9b0e603276380df6c80a796fa3d7faf8d
 xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2
SHA256: 308646d1d4b07e5c581cd7cca133b0e3410a1a3911a58d7d49b8ea106b64d0ba
 xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2

http://xorg.freedesktop.org/archive/individual/driver/xf86-video-intel-2....
MD5:  87190671c5bdc2606cb9ca99406c660a  xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.gz
SHA1: 1ae6c0ed2a4b586159019b2c321dc1e18ca13d40
 xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.gz
SHA256: 5b278c5bbdc27d2aef3e0e87625da83163551052aa7d257525f4919e0c0d91ef
 xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.gz

--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre

_______________________________________________
xorg(a)lists.x.org: X.Org support
Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
Your subscription address: ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  Hi,
>  
>  
>  Would it be possible to pull in and package xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  
>  
>  These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X. 
It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many people any
more.

This update is an exception, but xorg-x11-drv package updates are
usually fairly dull and not worth caring much about these days. I don't
think you can use this update as a typical example of an xorg-x11-drv
update. I'm sure ajax is considering whether this one is appropriate as
an update.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi Adam,

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote:

>  On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  >
>  > Would it be possible to pull in and package xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  >
>  >
>  > These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.
>
>  It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many people any
>  more.
>  
Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the desktop and video
acceleration (overlay) on my machine.


>  This update is an exception, but xorg-x11-drv package updates are
>  usually fairly dull and not worth caring much about these days. I don't
>  think you can use this update as a typical example of an xorg-x11-drv
>  update. I'm sure ajax is considering whether this one is appropriate as
>  an update.
>  
Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 update. I'll be
filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.

-Ilyes


>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Tom London]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi Adam,
>
>  On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to pull in and package xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
> > > updates more frequently in Fedora?
> > >
> > >
> > > These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.
> >
> > It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many people any
> > more.
>
>
>  Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the desktop and video
>  acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
>
> >
> >
> > This update is an exception, but xorg-x11-drv package updates are
> > usually fairly dull and not worth caring much about these days. I don't
> > think you can use this update as a typical example of an xorg-x11-drv
> > update. I'm sure ajax is considering whether this one is appropriate as
> > an update.
>
>
>  Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 update. I'll be
>  filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
>
>  -Ilyes
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Adam Williamson
> > Fedora QA Community Monkey
> > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
> > http://www.happyassassin.net
> > 
Believe there are already a few BZs for GPU lockup:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869354
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879823

tom
-- 
Tom London

[Adam Williamson]

On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  Hi Adam,
>  
>  On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>          On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>          > Hi,
>          >
>          >
>          > Would it be possible to pull in and package
>          xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>          > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>          >
>          >
>          > These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.
>          
>          
>          It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many
>          people any
>          more.
>  
>  
>  Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the desktop and
>  video acceleration (overlay) on my machine. 
>  Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 update.
> I'll be
>  filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report. 
I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would you want us
to move to it?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi Adam,

On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson" <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  > Hi Adam,
>  >
>  > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  > wrote:
>  >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  >         > Hi,
>  >         >
>  >         >
>  >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
>  >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  >         >
>  >         >
>  >         > These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.
>  >
>  >
>  >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many
>  >         people any
>  >         more.
>  >
>  >
>  > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the desktop and
>  > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
>
>  > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 update. I'll be
>  > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
>
>  I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would you want us
>  to move to it? 
No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From the
changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the issues reported for
GM45.

-Ilyes

>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Ebru Arslan]

I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and this
platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel driver.
i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i make ./configure
but i already updated Fedora 14 .

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi Adam,
>
>  On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson" <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  > > Hi Adam,
>  > >
>  > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  > > wrote:
>  > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  > >         > Hi,
>  > >         >
>  > >         >
>  > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
>  > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  > >         >
>  > >         >
>  > >         > These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but that's not many
>  > >         people any
>  > >         more.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the desktop and
>  > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
>  >
>  > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 update. I'll be
>  > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
>  >
>  > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would you want us
>  > to move to it?
>
>  No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From the
>  changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the issues reported for
>  GM45.
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>  > --
>  > Adam Williamson
>  > Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>  > http://www.happyassassin.net
>  >
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 01:10:40 +0200
Ebru Arslan <earslan2005(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 .  
Please note that Fedora 14 is end of life and no longer supported. 
It gets no updates or other support now. 

>  our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
>  this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
>  I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
>  driver. i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
>  version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
>  make ./configure but i already updated Fedora 14 . 
You should consider upgrading to a supported release (16 or 17, with 18
coming out soon). 

If you can duplicate the problem there, please file a bug on it. 

See: 

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems 

for things to try and information to include in your bug report. 

kevin

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

I am using Adlink cPCI 3970D board. and my system also include cPCI 3455
driver compatible just Fedora 14 32 bit.
so I dont have chance to use other revision. how can i fix this case?
cPCI 3970D include intel HD 3000 i915 graphic chipset. and i am developing
opengl programming.

thanks

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 01:10:40 +0200
>  Ebru Arslan <earslan2005(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>
>  > I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 .
>
>  Please note that Fedora 14 is end of life and no longer supported.
>  It gets no updates or other support now.
>
>  > our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
>  > this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
>  > I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
>  > driver. i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
>  > version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
>  > make ./configure but i already updated Fedora 14 .
>
>  You should consider upgrading to a supported release (16 or 17, with 18
>  coming out soon).
>
>  If you can duplicate the problem there, please file a bug on it.
>
>  See:
>
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Xorg_problems
>
>  for things to try and information to include in your bug report.
>
>  kevin
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Sérgio Basto]

On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:46 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  I am using Adlink cPCI 3970D board. and my system also include cPCI
>  3455 driver compatible just Fedora 14 32 bit.  
why is not compatible with newer Fedoras ? is the kernel ?

>  so I dont have chance to use other revision. how can i fix this
> case?
>  cPCI 3970D include intel HD 3000 i915 graphic chipset. and i am
>  developing opengl programming. 
>   
>          
>   
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

On Dec 16, 2012 2:30 AM, "Sérgio Basto" <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:46 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  > I am using Adlink cPCI 3970D board. and my system also include cPCI
>  > 3455 driver compatible just Fedora 14 32 bit.
>
>  why is not compatible with newer Fedoras ? is the kernel ? 
There might be few drm fixes that are only available on recent kernels.

-Ilyes

>  > so I dont have chance to use other revision. how can i fix this case?
>  > cPCI 3970D include intel HD 3000 i915 graphic chipset. and i am
>  > developing opengl programming.
>  >
>
>  >
>  >
>
>  --
>  Sérgio M. B.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

these driver is using kernel file (like header etc) if i use Fedora 17,
they are not working.

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:46 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  > I am using Adlink cPCI 3970D board. and my system also include cPCI
>  > 3455 driver compatible just Fedora 14 32 bit.
>
>  why is not compatible with newer Fedoras ? is the kernel ?
>
>  > so I dont have chance to use other revision. how can i fix this case?
>  > cPCI 3970D include intel HD 3000 i915 graphic chipset. and i am
>  > developing opengl programming.
>  >
>
>  >
>  >
>
>  --
>  Sérgio M. B.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Sérgio Basto]

On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
>  this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic. 
>  I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
>  driver. 
>  i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
>  version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
>  make ./configure
>  but i already updated Fedora 14 .  
When I want update packages I do custom rpms, and recently use mock (*)
to build the packages. 

#cd fedora-scm/
#git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/xorg-x11-drv-intel.git
#cd xorg-x11-drv-intel/
edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec 
change version to Version:   2.20.16

fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-x86_64 (or fedora-14-x86_64)

fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-i386 (or fedora-14-i386)

and finally 
rpm -Uvh the build rpms

if not have mock and fedpkg in F14 you could try 

rpmbuild -ba xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec ... 

(*) my notes to use mock 
http://www.serjux.com/alps/how_to_use_mock.txt

>  On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta
> <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>          Hi Adam,
>          
>          On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson"
>          <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>          >
>          > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>          > > Hi Adam,
>          > >
>          > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson
>          <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>          > > wrote:
>          > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta
>          wrote:
>          > >         > Hi,
>          > >         >
>          > >         >
>          > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
>          > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>          > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>          > >         >
>          > >         >
>          > >         > These are kinda critical for the stability of
>          desktop/X.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but
>          that's not many
>          > >         people any
>          > >         more.
>          > >
>          > >
>          > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the
>          desktop and
>          > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
>          >
>          > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16
>          update. I'll be
>          > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
>          >
>          > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would
>          you want us
>          > to move to it?
>          
>          No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From
>          the changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the
>          issues reported for GM45.
>          
>          -Ilyes
>          
>          > --
>          > Adam Williamson
>          > Fedora QA Community Monkey
>          > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>          > http://www.happyassassin.net
>          >
>          > --
>          > devel mailing list
>          > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>          > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>          
>          
>          --
>          devel mailing list
>          devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>          https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
>   
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

Just testing the 2.20.16 release and everything looks good so far on GM45.

-Ilyes


On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  > I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
>  > this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
>  > I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
>  > driver.
>  > i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
>  > version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
>  > make ./configure
>  > but i already updated Fedora 14 .
>
>  When I want update packages I do custom rpms, and recently use mock (*)
>  to build the packages.
>
>  #cd fedora-scm/
>  #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/xorg-x11-drv-intel.git
>  #cd xorg-x11-drv-intel/
>  edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
>  change version to Version:   2.20.16
>
>  fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-x86_64 (or fedora-14-x86_64)
>
>  fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-i386 (or fedora-14-i386)
>
>  and finally
>  rpm -Uvh the build rpms
>
>  if not have mock and fedpkg in F14 you could try
>
>  rpmbuild -ba xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec ...
>
>  (*) my notes to use mock
>  http://www.serjux.com/alps/how_to_use_mock.txt
>
>  > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  > wrote:
>  >         Hi Adam,
>  >
>  >         On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson"
>  >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  >         >
>  >         > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  >         > > Hi Adam,
>  >         > >
>  >         > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson
>  >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  >         > > wrote:
>  >         > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta
>  >         wrote:
>  >         > >         > Hi,
>  >         > >         >
>  >         > >         >
>  >         > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
>  >         > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  >         > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  >         > >         >
>  >         > >         >
>  >         > >         > These are kinda critical for the stability of
>  >         desktop/X.
>  >         > >
>  >         > >
>  >         > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but
>  >         that's not many
>  >         > >         people any
>  >         > >         more.
>  >         > >
>  >         > >
>  >         > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the
>  >         desktop and
>  >         > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
>  >         >
>  >         > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16
>  >         update. I'll be
>  >         > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
>  >         >
>  >         > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would
>  >         you want us
>  >         > to move to it?
>  >
>  >         No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From
>  >         the changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the
>  >         issues reported for GM45.
>  >
>  >         -Ilyes
>  >
>  >         > --
>  >         > Adam Williamson
>  >         > Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  >         > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>  >         > http://www.happyassassin.net
>  >         >
>  >         > --
>  >         > devel mailing list
>  >         > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  >         > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  >
>  >
>  >         --
>  >         devel mailing list
>  >         devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  >         https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  >
>
>  --
>  Sérgio M. B.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Ilyes Gouta]

and performance (blt and blending, cairo-demos) is way better than the
2.20.10 and 2.20.14 releases.

-Ilyes


On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  Just testing the 2.20.16 release and everything looks good so far on GM45.
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>
>  On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
>
> > On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> > > I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
> > > this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
> > > I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
> > > driver.
> > > i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
> > > version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
> > > make ./configure
> > > but i already updated Fedora 14 .
> >
> > When I want update packages I do custom rpms, and recently use mock (*)
> > to build the packages.
> >
> > #cd fedora-scm/
> > #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/xorg-x11-drv-intel.git
> > #cd xorg-x11-drv-intel/
> > edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
> > change version to Version:   2.20.16
> >
> > fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-x86_64 (or fedora-14-x86_64)
> >
> > fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-i386 (or fedora-14-i386)
> >
> > and finally
> > rpm -Uvh the build rpms
> >
> > if not have mock and fedpkg in F14 you could try
> >
> > rpmbuild -ba xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec ...
> >
> > (*) my notes to use mock
> > http://www.serjux.com/alps/how_to_use_mock.txt
> >
> > > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt;
> > > wrote:
> > >         Hi Adam,
> > >
> > >         On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson"
> > >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> > >         >
> > >         > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> > >         > > Hi Adam,
> > >         > >
> > >         > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson
> > >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
> > >         > > wrote:
> > >         > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta
> > >         wrote:
> > >         > >         > Hi,
> > >         > >         >
> > >         > >         >
> > >         > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
> > >         > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
> > >         > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
> > >         > >         >
> > >         > >         >
> > >         > >         > These are kinda critical for the stability of
> > >         desktop/X.
> > >         > >
> > >         > >
> > >         > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but
> > >         that's not many
> > >         > >         people any
> > >         > >         more.
> > >         > >
> > >         > >
> > >         > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the
> > >         desktop and
> > >         > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
> > >         >
> > >         > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel 2.20.16
> > >         update. I'll be
> > >         > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
> > >         >
> > >         > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would
> > >         you want us
> > >         > to move to it?
> > >
> > >         No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From
> > >         the changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the
> > >         issues reported for GM45.
> > >
> > >         -Ilyes
> > >
> > >         > --
> > >         > Adam Williamson
> > >         > Fedora QA Community Monkey
> > >         > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
> > >         > http://www.happyassassin.net
> > >         >
> > >         > --
> > >         > devel mailing list
> > >         > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > >         > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > >
> > >         --
> > >         devel mailing list
> > >         devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > >         https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sérgio M. B.
> >
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>

[Tom London]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  and performance (blt and blending, cairo-demos) is way better than the
>  2.20.10 and 2.20.14 releases.
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>
>  On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just testing the 2.20.16 release and everything looks good so far on GM45.
> >
> > -Ilyes
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
> >>
> >> On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> >> > I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
> >> > this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
> >> > I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
> >> > driver.
> >> > i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
> >> > version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
> >> > make ./configure
> >> > but i already updated Fedora 14 .
> >>
> >> When I want update packages I do custom rpms, and recently use mock (*)
> >> to build the packages.
> >>
> >> #cd fedora-scm/
> >> #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/xorg-x11-drv-intel.git
> >> #cd xorg-x11-drv-intel/
> >> edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
> >> change version to Version:   2.20.16
> >>
> >> fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-x86_64 (or fedora-14-x86_64)
> >>
> >> fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-i386 (or fedora-14-i386)
> >>
> >> and finally
> >> rpm -Uvh the build rpms
> >>
> >> if not have mock and fedpkg in F14 you could try
> >>
> >> rpmbuild -ba xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec ...
> >>
> >> (*) my notes to use mock
> >> http://www.serjux.com/alps/how_to_use_mock.txt
> >>
> >> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt;
> >> > wrote:
> >> >         Hi Adam,
> >> >
> >> >         On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson"
> >> >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> >> >         >
> >> >         > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> >> >         > > Hi Adam,
> >> >         > >
> >> >         > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson
> >> >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
> >> >         > > wrote:
> >> >         > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta
> >> >         wrote:
> >> >         > >         > Hi,
> >> >         > >         >
> >> >         > >         >
> >> >         > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and package
> >> >         > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
> >> >         > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
> >> >         > >         >
> >> >         > >         >
> >> >         > >         > These are kinda critical for the stability
> of
> >> >         desktop/X.
> >> >         > >
> >> >         > >
> >> >         > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but
> >> >         that's not many
> >> >         > >         people any
> >> >         > >         more.
> >> >         > >
> >> >         > >
> >> >         > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks the
> >> >         desktop and
> >> >         > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
> >> >         >
> >> >         > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel
> 2.20.16
> >> >         update. I'll be
> >> >         > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
> >> >         >
> >> >         > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why would
> >> >         you want us
> >> >         > to move to it?
> >> >
> >> >         No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable. From
> >> >         the changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the
> >> >         issues reported for GM45.
> >> >
> >> >         -Ilyes
> >> >
> >> >         > --
> >> >         > Adam Williamson
> >> >         > Fedora QA Community Monkey
> >> >         > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
> >> >         > http://www.happyassassin.net
> >> >         >
> >> >         > --
> >> >         > devel mailing list
> >> >         > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> >         > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >         --
> >> >         devel mailing list
> >> >         devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> >         https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sérgio M. B.
> >>
> >> -- 
I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.

System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
the hang/crash.

tom
-- 
Tom London

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Reindl Harald]

Am 16.12.2012 21:39, schrieb Tom London:
>  I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
>  xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
>  
>  System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
>  the hang/crash. 
can we please have a koji-build?

i notice slow gui / hangs after running KDE fpr many hours
on machines with VMware-Workstations guests in background
which is a little bit strange on IvyBrdige machines with
16 GB RAM and RAID10

after logout / login all is snappy again and note that the
in the background running VMs are not touched - so this
must be graphics related at all

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net&gt;wrote:

>  Am 16.12.2012 21:39, schrieb Tom London:
>  > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
>  > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
>  >
>  > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
>  > the hang/crash.
>
>  can we please have a koji-build?
>  
+1


>  i notice slow gui / hangs after running KDE fpr many hours
>  on machines with VMware-Workstations guests in background
>  which is a little bit strange on IvyBrdige machines with
>  16 GB RAM and RAID10
>  
Sounds bleedin' 'n cuttin' egde! :)

Please file a bug ! and let's have the 2.20.16 meanwhile, please!

Cheers,
-Ilyes


>  after logout / login all is snappy again and note that the
>  in the background running VMs are not touched - so this
>  must be graphics related at all
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

another problem.
fedora14 libdrm_2.2.22 doesnt update. i downloaded libdrim_2.2.40 and
configure but doesnt effect.


On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net&gt;wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Am 16.12.2012 21:39, schrieb Tom London:
> > > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
> > > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
> > >
> > > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
> > > the hang/crash.
> >
> > can we please have a koji-build?
> >
>
>  +1
>
>
> >
> > i notice slow gui / hangs after running KDE fpr many hours
> > on machines with VMware-Workstations guests in background
> > which is a little bit strange on IvyBrdige machines with
> > 16 GB RAM and RAID10
> >
>
>  Sounds bleedin' 'n cuttin' egde! :)
>
>  Please file a bug ! and let's have the 2.20.16 meanwhile, please!
>
>  Cheers,
>  -Ilyes
>
>
> >
> > after logout / login all is snappy again and note that the
> > in the background running VMs are not touched - so this
> > must be graphics related at all
> >
> >
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Sérgio Basto]

On Seg, 2012-12-17 at 19:12 +0300, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  another problem.
>  fedora14 libdrm_2.2.22 doesnt update. i downloaded libdrim_2.2.40 and
>  configure but doesnt effect. 
Hi , libdrm, intel drv, kernel normally have circle dependencies , i.e
to compile intel drv you need update libdrm  and to have libdrm you will
need update kernel etc. See here http://intellinuxgraphics.org
(http://intellinuxgraphics.org/2012Q4.html  ) to have one idea of we
expect to have .


Now, Fedora 14 have a kernel 2.6.35 , you should try see if you can work
with a more recent kernel. 
you wrote : "these driver is using kernel file (like header etc) if i
use Fedora 17, they are not working" .
It is hard to tell something, without see any line of the error
description ... , so what is the error ?  Are you sure that doesn't
compile with more recent kernel ?  


-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still see
previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Seg, 2012-12-17 at 19:12 +0300, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  > another problem.
>  > fedora14 libdrm_2.2.22 doesnt update. i downloaded libdrim_2.2.40 and
>  > configure but doesnt effect.
>
>  Hi , libdrm, intel drv, kernel normally have circle dependencies , i.e
>  to compile intel drv you need update libdrm  and to have libdrm you will
>  need update kernel etc. See here http://intellinuxgraphics.org
>  (http://intellinuxgraphics.org/2012Q4.html  ) to have one idea of we
>  expect to have .
>
>
>  Now, Fedora 14 have a kernel 2.6.35 , you should try see if you can work
>  with a more recent kernel.
>  you wrote : "these driver is using kernel file (like header etc) if i
>  use Fedora 17, they are not working" .
>  It is hard to tell something, without see any line of the error
>  description ... , so what is the error ?  Are you sure that doesn't
>  compile with more recent kernel ?
>
>
>  --
>  Sérgio M. B.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Sérgio Basto]

On Ter, 2012-12-18 at 10:39 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still
> see
>  previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.  
Do the package for libdrm and upgrade with rpm -Uvh 

#cd fedora-scm/
#git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/libdrm.git 
#cd libdrm
edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec 
change version to 

#rpmbuild -ba libdrm.spec 

rpm -Uvh packages built .


-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

i did like that but it doesnt work.
I updated Fedora 14 32 bit. then i installed driver from intelligraphic.org.
know Fedora 14 is start but after that stuck.

On 12/18/12, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Ter, 2012-12-18 at 10:39 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> > libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still see
> > previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.
>
>  Do the package for libdrm and upgrade with rpm -Uvh
>
>  #cd fedora-scm/
>  #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/libdrm.git
>  #cd libdrm
>  edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
>  change version to
>
>  #rpmbuild -ba libdrm.spec
>
>  rpm -Uvh packages built .
>
>
>  --
>  Sérgio M. B.
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hey,

Would it be possible to also push the xf86-video-intel-2.20.16 update to
Fedora 16 (technically it's not EOL yet)?

-Ilyes


On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ebru Arslan <earslan2005(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  i did like that but it doesnt work.
>  I updated Fedora 14 32 bit. then i installed driver from
>  intelligraphic.org.
>  know Fedora 14 is start but after that stuck.
>
>  On 12/18/12, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
>  > On Ter, 2012-12-18 at 10:39 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  >> libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still see
>  >> previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.
>  >
>  > Do the package for libdrm and upgrade with rpm -Uvh
>  >
>  > #cd fedora-scm/
>  > #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/libdrm.git
>  > #cd libdrm
>  > edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
>  > change version to
>  >
>  > #rpmbuild -ba libdrm.spec
>  >
>  > rpm -Uvh packages built .
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Sérgio M. B.
>  >
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ebru Arslan]

nearly day and night 1.5 week i am trying the install but unfortunately
Fedora 14 32 bit has many bug.
xf86-video-intel-2.20.16 has also bug. this package wants

xorg-server macros for autogen . after installed they dont accept and wants
new version. This package wants many pkg installation
finally this package wants Inputproto-2.2.99.1 but this is not exist. and i
stuck again

Intel HD 3000 graphic card - i915 not compatible for Fedora 14 32 bit. up
to Fedora 16 too. just Fedora 17 32 bit has this driver.

I try to compile own kernel include this package start to 2.4.28 kernel but
again many bug.

I understood also 1 thing. Fedora all revision its not good for realtime
application.

If you have any idea to try please send me email with installation steps.
(which is not include mock or others.)

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hey,
>
>  Would it be possible to also push the xf86-video-intel-2.20.16 update to
>  Fedora 16 (technically it's not EOL yet)?
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ebru Arslan <earslan2005(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:
>
> > i did like that but it doesnt work.
> > I updated Fedora 14 32 bit. then i installed driver from
> > intelligraphic.org.
> > know Fedora 14 is start but after that stuck.
> >
> > On 12/18/12, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
> > > On Ter, 2012-12-18 at 10:39 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> > >> libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still see
> > >> previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.
> > >
> > > Do the package for libdrm and upgrade with rpm -Uvh
> > >
> > > #cd fedora-scm/
> > > #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/libdrm.git
> > > #cd libdrm
> > > edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
> > > change version to
> > >
> > > #rpmbuild -ba libdrm.spec
> > >
> > > rpm -Uvh packages built .
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sérgio M. B.
> > >
> > > --
> > > devel mailing list
> > > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 10:03 PM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hey,
>
>  Would it be possible to also push the xf86-video-intel-2.20.16 update to
>  Fedora 16 (technically it's not EOL yet)?
>  
I just ran a xorg-x11-drv-intel scratch build for f16 w/ the new
xf86-video-intel-2.20.16 and the older
intel-gpu-tools-20110817 snapshots and AFAICT it looks good:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4815120

Is it possible to have the update for Fedora 16?

-Ilyes


>  -Ilyes
>
>
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Ebru Arslan <earslan2005(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:
>
> > i did like that but it doesnt work.
> > I updated Fedora 14 32 bit. then i installed driver from
> > intelligraphic.org.
> > know Fedora 14 is start but after that stuck.
> >
> > On 12/18/12, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
> > > On Ter, 2012-12-18 at 10:39 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> > >> libdrm revision is 2.2.22 but i configure 2.4.40. but system still see
> > >> previous one. so my all autogen.sh working result is fail.
> > >
> > > Do the package for libdrm and upgrade with rpm -Uvh
> > >
> > > #cd fedora-scm/
> > > #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/libdrm.git
> > > #cd libdrm
> > > edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
> > > change version to
> > >
> > > #rpmbuild -ba libdrm.spec
> > >
> > > rpm -Uvh packages built .
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sérgio M. B.
> > >
> > > --
> > > devel mailing list
> > > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Roberto Ragusa]

On 12/16/2012 09:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:

>  i notice slow gui / hangs after running KDE fpr many hours on
> machines with VMware-Workstations guests in background which is a little bit strange on
> IvyBrdige machines with 16 GB RAM and RAID10
>  
>  after logout / login all is snappy again and note that the in the background running VMs
> are not touched - so this must be graphics related at all 
Does vmware continuously blink something in the system tray?

It could be tripping into this:

http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-November/034555.html

It happened to me with psi, I fixed it with this patch, but
my attempt to have it merged has been ignored completely...

-- 
   Roberto Ragusa    mail at robertoragusa.it

[ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.20.16

[Reindl Harald]

Am 17.12.2012 17:27, schrieb Roberto Ragusa:
>  On 12/16/2012 09:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>  
> > i notice slow gui / hangs after running KDE fpr many hours on machines with
> VMware-Workstations guests in background which is a little bit strange on IvyBrdige
> machines with 16 GB RAM and RAID10
> >
> > after logout / login all is snappy again and note that the in the background running
> VMs are not touched - so this must be graphics related at all
>  
>  Does vmware continuously blink something in the system tray? 
not here, vm's are started with shell-scripts as seperated users

but maybe "sonata" a mpd-client does with his systray icon
at times where the system becomes crappy the whole systray
is blinking around - feels really poor on a machine with
the power few years ago you had in a server-house

>  It could be tripping into this:
>  
>  http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2012-November/034555.html
>  
>  It happened to me with psi, I fixed it with this patch, but
>  my attempt to have it merged has been ignored completely... 
hmmm

[Tom London]

On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:56 AM, Ilyes Gouta
> <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> > and performance (blt and blending, cairo-demos) is way better than the
> > 2.20.10 and 2.20.14 releases.
> >
> > -Ilyes
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Just testing the 2.20.16 release and everything looks good so far on GM45.
> >>
> >> -Ilyes
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Dom, 2012-12-16 at 01:10 +0200, Ebru Arslan wrote:
> >>> > I am using 32 bit Fedora 14 . our platform is Adlink cPCI-3970D and
> >>> > this platform using Intel HD 3000 i915 graphic.
> >>> > I install Base video mode. after that i dont achieve install intel
> >>> > driver.
> >>> > i need installation steps of xf86-video-intel 2.20.16 . libdrm
> >>> > version,X-server version, etc. also create problem when i
> >>> > make ./configure
> >>> > but i already updated Fedora 14 .
> >>>
> >>> When I want update packages I do custom rpms, and recently use mock (*)
> >>> to build the packages.
> >>>
> >>> #cd fedora-scm/
> >>> #git clone git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/xorg-x11-drv-intel.git
> >>> #cd xorg-x11-drv-intel/
> >>> edit xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec
> >>> change version to Version:   2.20.16
> >>>
> >>> fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-x86_64 (or fedora-14-x86_64)
> >>>
> >>> fedpkg mockbuild --root fedora-18-i386 (or fedora-14-i386)
> >>>
> >>> and finally
> >>> rpm -Uvh the build rpms
> >>>
> >>> if not have mock and fedpkg in F14 you could try
> >>>
> >>> rpmbuild -ba xorg-x11-drv-intel.spec ...
> >>>
> >>> (*) my notes to use mock
> >>> http://www.serjux.com/alps/how_to_use_mock.txt
> >>>
> >>> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Ilyes Gouta
> <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt;
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >         Hi Adam,
> >>> >
> >>> >         On Dec 15, 2012 9:48 PM, "Adam Williamson"
> >>> >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> >>> >         >
> >>> >         > On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 20:54 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
> >>> >         > > Hi Adam,
> >>> >         > >
> >>> >         > > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Adam Williamson
> >>> >         <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
> >>> >         > > wrote:
> >>> >         > >         On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes
> Gouta
> >>> >         wrote:
> >>> >         > >         > Hi,
> >>> >         > >         >
> >>> >         > >         >
> >>> >         > >         > Would it be possible to pull in and
> package
> >>> >         > >         xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
> >>> >         > >         > updates more frequently in Fedora?
> >>> >         > >         >
> >>> >         > >         >
> >>> >         > >         > These are kinda critical for the
> stability of
> >>> >         desktop/X.
> >>> >         > >
> >>> >         > >
> >>> >         > >         It sucks if you use an 830 or 845, sure, but
> >>> >         that's not many
> >>> >         > >         people any
> >>> >         > >         more.
> >>> >         > >
> >>> >         > >
> >>> >         > > Nah, I have a GM45, and this particular update breaks
> the
> >>> >         desktop and
> >>> >         > > video acceleration (overlay) on my machine.
> >>> >         >
> >>> >         > > Let's just move to the latest xf86-video-intel
> 2.20.16
> >>> >         update. I'll be
> >>> >         > > filing a bugzilla w/ the GPU lockup report.
> >>> >         >
> >>> >         > I'm confused. If this update breaks your system, why
> would
> >>> >         you want us
> >>> >         > to move to it?
> >>> >
> >>> >         No, the 2.20.14 which is in updates-testing isn't stable.
> From
> >>> >         the changelog, the 2.20.16 looks like it has fixes for the
> >>> >         issues reported for GM45.
> >>> >
> >>> >         -Ilyes
> >>> >
> >>> >         > --
> >>> >         > Adam Williamson
> >>> >         > Fedora QA Community Monkey
> >>> >         > IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca:
> adamwfedora
> >>> >         > http://www.happyassassin.net
> >>> >         >
> >>> >         > --
> >>> >         > devel mailing list
> >>> >         > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >>> >         > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >         --
> >>> >         devel mailing list
> >>> >         devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >>> >         https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sérgio M. B.
> >>>
> >>> --
>
>  I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
>  xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
>
>  System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
>  the hang/crash.
>  
Sigh.  Spoke too soon. Hang resurfaced. See:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461

tom
-- 
Tom London

[Ilyes Gouta]

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  >
>  > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
>  > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
>  >
>  > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
>  > the hang/crash.
>  >
>
>  Sigh.  Spoke too soon. Hang resurfaced. See:
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461 

It still worth the update, IMHO. The 2.20.16 is just way better than the
2.20.10.

As the gdm crash is still there, despite the 2.20.16 being the latest
release, it might make sense to report the bug (with all the relevant
information) directly on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/

-Ilyes



>  tom
>  --
>  Tom London
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Ebru Arslan]

hi ilyes,
please tell me the installation folder.
rpmbuilder looking root/rpm../SOURCE .
but my all file under my account.

fed

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
> > > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
> > >
> > > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
> > > the hang/crash.
> > >
> >
> > Sigh.  Spoke too soon. Hang resurfaced. See:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461
>
>
>  It still worth the update, IMHO. The 2.20.16 is just way better than the
>  2.20.10.
>
>  As the gdm crash is still there, despite the 2.20.16 being the latest
>  release, it might make sense to report the bug (with all the relevant
>  information) directly on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > tom
> > --
> > Tom London
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Ebru Arslan]

unfortunatly rpmbuilder also giving error. git download
intel-gpu-tools-20121217. etc. bz2 version but spec file lookin
.........20121219

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
> > > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
> > >
> > > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
> > > the hang/crash.
> > >
> >
> > Sigh.  Spoke too soon. Hang resurfaced. See:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461
>
>
>  It still worth the update, IMHO. The 2.20.16 is just way better than the
>  2.20.10.
>
>  As the gdm crash is still there, despite the 2.20.16 being the latest
>  release, it might make sense to report the bug (with all the relevant
>  information) directly on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/
>
>  -Ilyes
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > tom
> > --
> > Tom London
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Matthias Runge]

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

On 12/17/2012 09:56 AM, Ebru Arslan wrote:
>  
>  unfortunatly rpmbuilder also giving error. git download 
>  intel-gpu-tools-20121217. etc. bz2 version but spec file lookin 
>  .........20121219
>  
>  On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ilyes Gouta
>  <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  
>  Hi,
>  
>  On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>   

please stop top posting and HTML posting as well.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines?rd=Communicate/Mai...

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines?rd=Communicate/Mai...

Thanks.
- -- 
Matthias Runge <mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de&gt;
               <mrunge(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQz1+pAAoJEOnz8qQwcaIWzGkH/RbCiaaiZiftS1g83Ho1UZoF
> iorBu3aqmfo4ezzb1xhyvWIJyf8JkPNKCp5b+RB+9krpgEUEox/Wi5nwvJ5r1YyV
> r6OWr7qWRyuUd+ba0JG1xJ0lWiHZ3FvxkJ0qJlAb2JGgLKRVT9NVHH/H+KWXZ+ux
> CQ4oppFYVNADGnnkgayIvcr9PVh3EV4E1YaaCvdCyjdJi01rGyE8QvEaubIPqm5Z
> /6N/mMYEWcF5INAiGHtDhj4mXembnsCdqUvlgg0q/9ntGp6nRE0VF7p1tv7PQoSA
> WMIGL0ZXnSBbjwY3k9McjdzWBZnBvFUfGWzK9qpXI98uSBEEbqryzSPTpNaASa0=
> =x8ib
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Tom London]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Ilyes Gouta <ilyes.gouta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:27 AM, Tom London <selinux(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I concur: I locally build xorg-x11-drv-intel (including
> > > xf86-video-intel-2.20.16.tar.bz2), updated, and logged out/in.
> > >
> > > System does appear snappier, and I have not yet been able to recreate
> > > the hang/crash.
> > >
> >
> > Sigh.  Spoke too soon. Hang resurfaced. See:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877461
>
>
>  It still worth the update, IMHO. The 2.20.16 is just way better than the
>  2.20.10.
>
>  As the gdm crash is still there, despite the 2.20.16 being the latest
>  release, it might make sense to report the bug (with all the relevant
>  information) directly on https://bugs.freedesktop.org/
>
>  -Ilyes
>  
I agree. System actually is running much better with the update to
2.20.16: The entire system feels snappier.

I've updated my "grab the error state script" to also grab
/var/log/Xorg.0.log and the gdm logs.

When I capture these again, I'll report upstream....

tom

-- 
Tom London

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 06:30 -0800, Tom London wrote:

>  The entire system feels snappier. 
FWIW, years of experience with forums, crappy review sites and Phoronix
forums have taught me to automatically ignore absolutely any comment
which includes this form of words. It is, in 99.99% of cases, entirely
meaningless.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Adam Jackson]

On Sat, 2012-12-15 at 12:23 +0100, Ilyes Gouta wrote:
>  Hi,
>  
>  
>  Would it be possible to pull in and package xorg-x11-drv-intel driver
>  updates more frequently in Fedora?
>  
>  
>  These are kinda critical for the stability of desktop/X. 
This is a bit much.  The upstream announce email went out at 5AM (my
time, 2AM Pacific), by to my reckoning:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2012-December/023371.html

And your followup here is timestamped 6:23AM my time.  I apologize for
not reading fedora-devel on weekends, particularly before sunrise, but
I'm not going to lose much sleep over it (if you'll pardon the
expression).

I'll submit an update today.  Thanks for testing!

- ajax

[Sérgio Basto]

On Seg, 2012-12-17 at 11:24 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
>  I'll submit an update today.  Thanks for testing! 
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xorg-x11-drv-intel

To follow when was pushed to updates-testing and to give feedback and
karma .

-- 
Sérgio M. B.

fltk

[Adrian]

Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is ridiculous;

[root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags

-Wl,-z,relro -lfltk

should be (built from source)

[root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
-L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
-ldl -lm -lX11
[root@fedora18desk ~]# 

vk4tux

fltk

[Susi Lehtola]

On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
Adrian <vk4tux(a)bigpond.com&gt; wrote:
>  
>  Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is
>  ridiculous;
>  
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
>  
>  -Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
>  
>  should be (built from source)
>  
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
>  -L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
>  -ldl -lm -lX11
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  
I'm guessing your build from source is a static one. The shared library
in Fedora is already linked to all of the above libraries, so if one
only uses fltk then one only needs to link to -lfltk.
-- 
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org

fltk

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 12/19/2012 04:22 PM, Susi Lehtola wrote:
>  On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
>  Adrian <vk4tux(a)bigpond.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> > Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is
> > ridiculous;
> >
> > [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
> >
> > -Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
> >
> > should be (built from source)
> >
> > [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
> > -L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
> > -ldl -lm -lX11
> > [root@fedora18desk ~]#
>
>  I'm guessing your build from source is a static one. 
Nevertheless, lftk-config should not return -Wl,-z,relro.

Please file a BZ against fltk.

Ralf

fltk

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 17:22:05 +0200,
   Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
>
> I'm guessing your build from source is a static one. The shared library
> in Fedora is already linked to all of the above libraries, so if one
> only uses fltk then one only needs to link to -lfltk. 
In some cases you can get DSO linking errors when you don't explicitly 
link to those other packages. People building from source might not 
care, but this can cause problems for official builds.

fltk

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(a)wolff.to&gt; wrote:
>  In some cases you can get DSO linking errors when you don't
> explicitly link
>  to those other packages. People building from source might not care, but
>  this can cause problems for official builds. 
Can you elaborate on this or point me to where I can learn more?  That
is absolutely counter to my understanding.

Consider: What happens if   you have libfoo 1.0.0  which itself uses
-lbar ...  and later upgrade your system to libfoo 1.0.1 which itself
is -lbar -lm (and is API/ABI and functionally identical).  If I
understand you correctly you're saying that now random -lfoo users
which themselves make no use of -lm will now randomly fail.  I believe
this is incorrect and would be a terrible problem if it were true.

AFAIK, you should only link your actual direct dependencies. If they
have their own dependencies the dynamic linker will handle it, and
anything else leads to madness. Am I full of it?

fltk

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 11:23 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Bruno Wolff III
> <bruno(a)wolff.to&gt; wrote:
>  > In some cases you can get DSO linking errors when you don't explicitly link
>  > to those other packages. People building from source might not care, but
>  > this can cause problems for official builds.
>  
>  Can you elaborate on this or point me to where I can learn more?  That
>  is absolutely counter to my understanding.
>  
>  Consider: What happens if   you have libfoo 1.0.0  which itself uses
>  -lbar ...  and later upgrade your system to libfoo 1.0.1 which itself
>  is -lbar -lm (and is API/ABI and functionally identical).  If I
>  understand you correctly you're saying that now random -lfoo users
>  which themselves make no use of -lm will now randomly fail.  I believe
>  this is incorrect and would be a terrible problem if it were true. 
It's the other way around.  If libfoo 1.0.0 linked with -lbar and -lm,
and then you upgraded to libfoo 1.0.1 which *no longer* links to -lm,
now stuff that links to libfoo might fail if those things did not
specifically request -lm themselves when they were built, and they need
it.

>  AFAIK, you should only link your actual direct dependencies. If they
>  have their own dependencies the dynamic linker will handle it, and
>  anything else leads to madness. Am I full of it? 
You should link anything you use and not depend on your linked libraries
to pull in libm if your own code uses eg pow() or sqrt().

I think the original poster is complaining about this specific
situation; IIUC that fltk tool is supposed to provide (pkg-config style)
the link line that includes most ftlk libraries, so that you can simply
run it and get most of what you need.  Unfortunately the Fedora version
was likely linked with -Wl,as-needed and thus doesn't include most of
the common fltk libraries.  So yes, it's really a hack to allow lazy
programmers not to explicitly link to every ftlk library they need.  But
apparently a standard one for fltk users?

Dan

fltk

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Dan Williams <dcbw(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  It's the other way around.  If libfoo 1.0.0 linked with -lbar and
> -lm,
>  and then you upgraded to libfoo 1.0.1 which *no longer* links to -lm,
>  now stuff that links to libfoo might fail if those things did not
>  specifically request -lm themselves when they were built, and they need
>  it. 
Ah. I read your statement backwards.

I think we're in agreement. Everyone should (really, must) link their
own dependencies explicitly, and pkgconf style config lines should
generally only list the library itself to avoid creating a situation
where the caller fails to correctly identify its dependencies and
doesn't know it. But maybe fltk intentionally does something
inadvisable here.

fltk

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 11:56 -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Dan Williams
> <dcbw(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > It's the other way around.  If libfoo 1.0.0 linked with -lbar and -lm,
>  > and then you upgraded to libfoo 1.0.1 which *no longer* links to -lm,
>  > now stuff that links to libfoo might fail if those things did not
>  > specifically request -lm themselves when they were built, and they need
>  > it.
>  
>  Ah. I read your statement backwards.
>  
>  I think we're in agreement. Everyone should (really, must) link their
>  own dependencies explicitly, and pkgconf style config lines should
>  generally only list the library itself to avoid creating a situation
>  where the caller fails to correctly identify its dependencies and
>  doesn't know it. But maybe fltk intentionally does something
>  inadvisable here. 
Yes, it appears to, but as a presumably fltk upstream sanctioned
mechanism that allows fltk apps to run one command to get the commonly
linked libraries, instead of having to link to all of them manually.
Yes, that's not best practice.  But at the same time, it does (a) make
fltk developers' lives easier, and (b) isn't something Fedora is likely
to change upstream.  Possibly we just have to live with it, otherwise we
periodically get to listen to a few surly, abrupt, and un-courteous fltk
users.

Dan

fltk

[Adrian]

No it is not, the reason flrig cannot be built in fedora as it is easy
in Ubuntu. Lets not get behind the 8 ball.

-----Original Message-----
From: Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: fltk
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:22:05 +0200


On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
Adrian <vk4tux(a)bigpond.com&gt; wrote:
>  
>  Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is
>  ridiculous;
>  
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
>  
>  -Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
>  
>  should be (built from source)
>  
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
>  -L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
>  -ldl -lm -lX11
>  [root@fedora18desk ~]#  
I'm guessing your build from source is a static one. The shared library
in Fedora is already linked to all of the above libraries, so if one
only uses fltk then one only needs to link to -lfltk.
-- 
Susi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola(a)fedoraproject.org

fltk

[Adam Jackson]

On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 01:55 +1000, Adrian wrote:
>  No it is not, the reason flrig cannot be built in fedora as it is
> easy
>  in Ubuntu. Lets not get behind the 8 ball. 
Assuming by flrig you mean this:

http://www.w1hkj.com/downloads/flrig/flrig-1.3.09.tar.gz

Then flrig itself is not exactly blameless:

/usr/bin/ld: flrig-rig.o: undefined reference to symbol 'XCreatePixmap'
/usr/bin/ld: note: 'XCreatePixmap' is defined in DSO /lib64/libX11.so.6
so try adding it to the linker command line
/lib64/libX11.so.6: could not read symbols: Invalid operation
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

In general you must not rely on what the libraries you link against
themselves link against.  If you need a symbol from libX11, say so.

(I suppose one could argue that fltk-config is not like pkgconfig and
that fltk promises to supply you more libraries than you need to link
against.  Which would be sort of funny, a "lightweight" toolkit bloating
out your link like that.)

- ajax

fltk

[Adrian]

This attitude is why people leave redhat for debian/ubuntu, get fltk
right and the rest will follow.
We have tested already.

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Jackson <ajax(a)redhat.com&gt;
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
Subject: Re: fltk
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:17:22 -0500


On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 01:55 +1000, Adrian wrote:
>  No it is not, the reason flrig cannot be built in fedora as it is
> easy
>  in Ubuntu. Lets not get behind the 8 ball. 
Assuming by flrig you mean this:

http://www.w1hkj.com/downloads/flrig/flrig-1.3.09.tar.gz

Then flrig itself is not exactly blameless:

/usr/bin/ld: flrig-rig.o: undefined reference to symbol 'XCreatePixmap'
/usr/bin/ld: note: 'XCreatePixmap' is defined in DSO /lib64/libX11.so.6
so try adding it to the linker command line
/lib64/libX11.so.6: could not read symbols: Invalid operation
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

In general you must not rely on what the libraries you link against
themselves link against.  If you need a symbol from libX11, say so.

(I suppose one could argue that fltk-config is not like pkgconfig and
that fltk promises to supply you more libraries than you need to link
against.  Which would be sort of funny, a "lightweight" toolkit bloating
out your link like that.)

- ajax

fltk

[Gregory Maxwell]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Adrian <vk4tux(a)bigpond.com&gt; wrote:
>  This attitude is why people leave redhat for debian/ubuntu, get fltk
> right
>  and the rest will follow.
>  We have tested already. 
Adrian, no disrespect intended— but I believe you are making a mistake
here.  It looks like package you're having trouble linking has
incorrect parameters and just happens to work on ubuntu due to leakly
pkgconf linker flags— it's not exposing its own direct dependencies
and the correct solution is to fix it, not fltk. While I'm possibly
mistaken due to some subtle detail of how the FLTK headers are setup I
think that is unlikely.

Everyone working on Fedora cares about doing the right thing— and
helping the packages Fedora packages do the right thing.  The tone
you're taking is unnecessary insulting regardless of how correct you
are... but when that kind of tone is combined with being incorrect it
contributes to an environment where developers justifiability have low
regard for some user complaints.  Since people care about doing the
right thing the tone isn't required nor is it helpful.

[linuxham] fltk

[Adrian]

So we see by the use of physiology, and the material rights of
substitution how resolve can be found.

Adrian ... vk4tux

-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian <vk4tux(a)bigpond.com&gt;
Reply-to: linuxham(a)yahoogroups.com
To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Cc: linuxham(a)yahoogroups.com
Subject: [linuxham] fltk
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000

  


Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is ridiculous;

[root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags

-Wl,-z,relro -lfltk

should be (built from source)

[root@fedora18desk ~]#  fltk-config --ldflags
-L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
-ldl -lm -lX11
[root@fedora18desk ~]# 

vk4tux


__._,_.___
Reply via web
post 
Reply to
sender 
Reply to
group 
Start a New
Topic 
Messages in
this topic
(1) 
Recent Activity: 

      * New Members 8 
      * New Files 1 
        
Visit Your Group 
Yahoo! Groups
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send
us Feedback 

.

__,_._,___

fltk

[Bryn M. Reeves]

On 19/12/12 15:12, Adrian wrote:
>  -Wl,-z,relro -lfltk 
Which is pretty close to what you get on current Ubuntu:

root@u1210-vm1:~# grep PRETTY /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu quantal (12.10)"

root@u1210-vm1:~# dpkg -s libfltk1.1 | head -2
Package: libfltk1.1
Status: install ok installed

root@u1210-vm1:~# fltk-config --ldflags
-L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk

>  should be (built from source) 
That might be what you get building from source but it's not what you'd
get on a current Ubuntu system with their flkt packages so it seems this
is not the cause of the problem you're seeing.

On Fedora the following command fails:

g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
-D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
-finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer   -DNDEBUG -g -O2   -o flrig
[...] -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk_images -lfltk  -ldl  -lrt  -lpthread

While on Ubuntu it works (run in a similarly prep'ed source tree);
something appears to be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
Ubuntu but it doesn't appear to have anything to do with the output
produced by fltk-config (which is identical in terms of library link
requests).

Regards,
Bryn.

fltk

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves <bmr(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Fedora the following command fails:
>
>  g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
>  -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
>  -finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer   -DNDEBUG -g -O2   -o flrig
>  [...] -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk_images -lfltk  -ldl  -lrt  -lpthread
>
>  While on Ubuntu it works (run in a similarly prep'ed source tree);
>  something appears to be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
>  Ubuntu 
Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
   Mirek

fltk

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves
> <bmr(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > On Fedora the following command fails:
>  >
>  > g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
>  > -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
>  > -finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer   -DNDEBUG -g -O2   -o flrig
>  > [...] -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk_images -lfltk  -ldl  -lrt  -lpthread
>  >
>  > While on Ubuntu it works (run in a similarly prep'ed source tree);
>  > something appears to be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
>  > Ubuntu
>  Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>     Mirek 
Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

fltk

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:

>  On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > Probably
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
> >    Mirek
>  
>  Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that? 
I don't think ANY other distro has done that pointless incompatible change 
(except those which switched to gold, which always behaves that way). It's 
still not the default in upstream ld.

        Kevin Kofler

fltk

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 00:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
>  
>  > On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>  >> Probably
>  >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>  >>    Mirek
>  > 
>  > Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that?
>  
>  I don't think ANY other distro has done that pointless incompatible change 
>  (except those which switched to gold, which always behaves that way). It's 
>  still not the default in upstream ld. 
Mandriva did it some time before Fedora did, IIRC.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

fltk

[Bryn M. Reeves]

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

On 12/20/2012 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 00:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > 
> >> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trma? wrote:
> >>> Probably 
> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
> >>>
> >>>  
Mirek
> >> 
> >> Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that?
> > 
> > I don't think ANY other distro has done that pointless
> > incompatible change (except those which switched to gold, which
> > always behaves that way). It's still not the default in upstream
> > ld.
>  
>  Mandriva did it some time before Fedora did, IIRC.
>   
Debian is implementing it in Wheezy:

http://wiki.debian.org/ToolChain/DSOLinking

Regards,
Bryn.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlDS7u0ACgkQ6YSQoMYUY94QwACfdzdMqeaLebrD4VxQoNKaU9OX
> uk4AnRjB5KB4MeKkorQ1dnQp2rySYDPi
> =nWsd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

fltk

[Bryn M. Reeves]

On 19/12/12 17:30, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves
> <bmr(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> > On Fedora the following command fails:
> >
> > g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
> > -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
> > -finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer   -DNDEBUG -g -O2   -o flrig
> > [...] -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk_images -lfltk  -ldl  -lrt  -lpthread
> >
> > While on Ubuntu it works (run in a similarly prep'ed source tree);
> > something appears to be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
> > Ubuntu
>  Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>     Mirek
>   
So it seems to be down to the fact that flrig includes <FL/x.H>:

$ fgrep 'FL/x.H' rig.cxx
#include <FL/x.H>
#include <FL/x.H>

> From FL/x.h: 
// These are internal fltk symbols that are necessary or useful for
// calling Xlib.  You should include this file if (and ONLY if) you
// need to call Xlib directly.  These symbols may not exist on non-X
// systems.

There are macros further on that use XCreatePixmap in their definition:

#   define fl_create_offscreen(w,h) \
  XCreatePixmap(fl_display, \
              (Fl_Surface_Device::surface()->class_name() ==
Fl_Display_Device::class_id ? \
              fl_window : fl_xid(Fl::first_window()) ) , \
              w, h, fl_visual->depth)

So I'd say that fltk apps that use this header really do need to specify
-lX11 in their own LDFLAGS as they will need these symbols directly.

So it's an flrig bug.

It's easy to work around:

$ LDFLAGS="-lX11" ./configure && make
[...]
$ ldd src/flrig
	linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x00007fffccb82000)
	libX11.so.6 => /lib64/libX11.so.6 (0x0000003c77600000)
[...]

I couldn't see where to report bugs on w1hkj.com...

Regards,
Bryn.

fltk

[Adrian]

-----Original Message-----
From: Bryn M. Reeves <bmr(a)redhat.com&gt;
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
Cc: Miloslav Trmač <mitr(a)volny.cz&gt;
Subject: Re: fltk
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:01:40 +0000


On 19/12/12 17:30, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves
> <bmr(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> > On Fedora the following command fails:
> >
> > g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
> > -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
> > -finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer   -DNDEBUG -g -O2   -o flrig
> > [...] -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk_images -lfltk  -ldl  -lrt  -lpthread
> >
> > While on Ubuntu it works (run in a similarly prep'ed source tree);
> > something appears to be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
> > Ubuntu
>  Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>     Mirek
>   
So it seems to be down to the fact that flrig includes <FL/x.H>:

$ fgrep 'FL/x.H' rig.cxx
#include <FL/x.H>
#include <FL/x.H>

> From FL/x.h: 
// These are internal fltk symbols that are necessary or useful for
// calling Xlib.  You should include this file if (and ONLY if) you
// need to call Xlib directly.  These symbols may not exist on non-X
// systems.

There are macros further on that use XCreatePixmap in their definition:

#   define fl_create_offscreen(w,h) \
  XCreatePixmap(fl_display, \
              (Fl_Surface_Device::surface()->class_name() ==
Fl_Display_Device::class_id ? \
              fl_window : fl_xid(Fl::first_window()) ) , \
              w, h, fl_visual->depth)

So I'd say that fltk apps that use this header really do need to specify
-lX11 in their own LDFLAGS as they will need these symbols directly.

So it's an flrig bug.

It's easy to work around:

$ LDFLAGS="-lX11" ./configure && make
[...]
$ ldd src/flrig
	linux-vdso.so.1 =>  (0x00007fffccb82000)
	libX11.so.6 => /lib64/libX11.so.6 (0x0000003c77600000)
[...]

I couldn't see where to report bugs on w1hkj.com...

Regards,
Bryn.

So why does this bug not show itself on Suse, and any of the Debian based builds?

vk4tux

fltk

[Bryn M. Reeves]

On 19/12/12 21:35, Adrian wrote:
>  *From*: Bryn M. Reeves <bmr(a)redhat.com 
>  On 19/12/12 17:30, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
> >    Mirek
>  So why does this bug not show itself on Suse, and any of the Debian based builds? 
They presumably haven't implemented the feature that Mirek pointed out.