[13:17] <seb128> tseliot: did you have a chance to look at bug #314406 yet btw?
[13:25] <tseliot> seb128: yes, but I'm waiting for Gnome's API freeze
[13:25] <seb128> tseliot: why?
[13:26] <tseliot> because I would like to adapt the patch to use the new functions in libgnome-desktop
[13:26] <tseliot> and I would like to write my patch only once
[13:28] <seb128> which means g-s-d will crash for everybody who changed their config upgrading to jaunty only because the upstream code might change again?
[13:36] <tseliot> seb128: no, it means that I would like to rebase my patch on the new code instead of simply keep adding functions which upstream drops
[13:36] <seb128> ah ok
[13:39] <tseliot> seb128: BTW doesn't the API freeze begin tomorrow?
[13:39] <seb128> tseliot: let me look at the schedule
[13:39] <tseliot> no, sorry, 14
[13:39] <tseliot> the 14th
[13:39] <seb128> tseliot: it does start this week indeed
[13:39] <tseliot> good :-)
[13:39] <seb128> I doubt anybody will do changes now
[13:40] <seb128> you can start working on your changes ;-)
[13:40] <tseliot> ok
[21:18] <bryce> mm, new xserver 1.5.99.901
[21:19] <tjaalton> yep
[21:23] <bryce> tjaalton: I'd also like to see the patch for bug #260138 in our new xserver
[21:24] <bryce> tjaalton: should I wait until you've finished the xserver packaging (so I can test builds), or put it in git for now after ensuring the patch applies, or...?
[21:25] <tjaalton> bryce: I was just thinking about it :)
[21:25] <tjaalton> the feature
[21:26] <tjaalton> the proto needs to be fixed first
[21:27] <tjaalton> maybe after alpha3
[21:31] <bryce> bug 260138 after alpha3, or the new xserver after alpha3?
[21:32] <tjaalton> that bug
[21:33] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: there are several input patches merged to 1.6 only recently...
[21:33] <Alexia_Death> did they get in?
[21:33] <bryce> tjaalton: ok
[21:33] <tjaalton> Alexia_Death: I'm not sure
[21:33] <tjaalton> Alexia_Death: oh, if they were already merged it means that they are in the rc1
[21:34] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: the last one was merged today...
[21:34] <Alexia_Death> not in rc1
[21:34] <Alexia_Death> and it fixes messed up buttons for tablers.
[21:34] <Alexia_Death> there also was a crash fix and history buffer fix.
[21:35] <tjaalton> then it was merged to master, not 1.6-branch
[21:35] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: cherrypicked for 1.6 all of them
[21:35] <Alexia_Death> and merged to both afaik-
[21:36] <tjaalton> Alexia_Death: which means they are in rc1..
[21:36] <Alexia_Death> even the one merged today?
[21:36] <tjaalton> rc1 was tagged 33min ago
[21:37] <Alexia_Death> oh!
[21:37] <tjaalton> oh, 23min
[21:37] <Alexia_Death> O_O
[21:37] <Alexia_Death> then they are in!
[21:37] <Alexia_Death> YAY.
[21:38] <Alexia_Death> then theres only a little issue with wacom diver and we have HOTPLUG!
[21:38] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: sorry, I didnt know when rc1 was taged.
[21:40] <tjaalton> np :)
[21:41] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: when its inn I will have mpre testers for my hotplug daemon...
[21:42] <Alexia_Death> tjaalton: it works btw;)
[21:43] <tjaalton> cool
[21:43] <Alexia_Death> got a tablet yourself?
[21:43] <tjaalton> I've got mine sitting idle..
[21:43] <Alexia_Death> :)
[21:44] <Alexia_Death> With those patches in, all thats needed is a little hack in wacom driver to keep X from killing itself when devices are removed and then you can just run the daemon and all will work.
[21:44] <Alexia_Death> err... except perhaps pad buttons
[22:08] <superm1> bryce, i had a short call with NV a little bit ago, and i posed a question about upgrading the ABI on older driver releases.  they're not likely to be doing it on r177 and below, but likely r180 and newer only
[22:08] <superm1> makes you question whether supporting all the other "older" stuff at all in the archive will be worth it
[22:08] <bryce> dah
[22:08] <tjaalton> \o/
[22:08] <tjaalton> :)
[22:09] <bryce> hrm, well until nouveau is better (or -nv de-obfuscates), that leaves us a bit stuck...
[22:09] <tjaalton> I know who's going to get all the shit..
[22:10] <tjaalton> oh, sh*t
[22:10] <bryce> superm1: I've a call with them tomorrow, do you have suggestions for what I should communicate?
[22:10]  * bryce passes out fans
[22:12] <bryce> wish we could do stuff like that...
[22:12] <tjaalton> maybe we do need a plan-b regarding nouveau (2D)?
[22:13] <bryce> has there been much testing on older cards?
[22:14] <tjaalton> no idea
[22:15] <tjaalton> altough, I'm not sure if it's better than -nv on those
[22:15] <tjaalton> some extra features yes
[22:16] <tjaalton> maybe it would be too much of an effort to make it supportable at this point..
[22:17] <jcristau> canonical could hire a nouveau developer :p
[22:21] <tjaalton> heh :)
[22:21] <superm1> bryce, well you can ask them to support more of  the releases, but from what i understand on how their development is working, porting the stub that identifies ABI supported in the driver becomes more and more work for them
[22:22] <superm1> bryce, so at least from the Dell perspective, we're asking them for current stable driver (r180) + unstable driver (r18[0+x]) match the ABI
[22:23] <tjaalton> there's a thread on nvnews.net where an update was requested (a couple of months ago), and they said that it was a WIP but low-priority... indeed
[22:24] <bryce> ideas on quantity of cards that will become unsupported in -nvidia with this, compared with intrepid?
[22:24] <bryce> few, lots, ...?
[22:24] <tjaalton> lots
[22:24] <superm1> bryce, so perhaps a good question to pose to them from your perspective is whether there is any intention of dropping cards with releases, or if they can try to focus on keeping cards supported going forward
[22:24] <tjaalton> 6xxx and earlier are now unsupported
[22:24] <superm1> oh they are. psh :(
[22:25] <tjaalton> well, would be if it's true
[22:26] <tjaalton> since 173 was the last one supporting 5xxx, and IIRC 177 supported 6xxx?
[22:26] <tjaalton> and 180 dropped it
[22:26] <superm1> man, that really sucks then.
[22:28] <tjaalton> oh sorry, seems like 6xxx is supported by 180.22
[22:29] <superm1> if they can commit to not dropping cards, then can at least transition people from 177 to 180 at upgrade
[22:29] <tjaalton> yes
[22:30] <bryce> okay
[22:30] <tjaalton> but the ones supported by -96 and -173 would be lost
[22:30] <tjaalton> but hey, there's hardy
[22:30] <tjaalton> :)
[22:30] <superm1> heh
[22:35] <bryce> feh, really if they intend to stop giving ABI updates for those, and drop card support in the process, they should release the docs for those old chips
[22:35] <bryce> else they'll just be encouraging people to switch to ATI/Intel
[22:36] <tjaalton> well, the GF5 series is maybe 5y old
[22:37] <superm1> well it's a question you can throw out at them at least about docs if they're not going to do ABI updates
[22:37] <tjaalton> it would be really nice
[22:37] <bryce> yeah, like "would you be open to considering releasing docs for ...."
[22:38] <bryce> I think I know the answer, but it's worth asking
[22:38] <tjaalton> "beep - beep - beep ..."
[22:38] <tjaalton> :)
[22:39] <bryce> if 6xxx is supported by 180.22, does that cut down the quantity of unsupported cards?  Or is it still "lots"?
[22:40] <tjaalton> GF5xxx and the delta between 96/173
[22:41] <tjaalton> ie. the ones that 96 supports but 173 doesn't
[22:42] <superm1> sounds like it will be a fun call for you tomorrow :)
[22:42] <tjaalton> looks like GF4 & GF5
[22:43] <bryce> superm1: and shuttleworth will be on it too...
[22:44] <superm1> no pressure or anything