[solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

takedown · 2010-04-21 18:54:48

Before we begin, I want to clarify that it is not an order or reproach, but rather a question.
Why the package xf86-video-intel takes so long without being updated?

From http://intellinuxgraphics.org/index.html

2010-4-9: Intel 2010Q1 graphics package released, including xf86-video-intel 2.11.0 release.
2010-1-5: xf86-video-intel 2.10.0 released, with user-modesetting removed, together with Intel 2009Q4 graphics package released.

The package is marked as outdated for a few weeks.
I understand that if I'd upgrade it, I can use ABS or AUR, but repeat, is simply a question.

Thanks and bye

Last edited by takedown (2010-04-24 14:29:40)

wonder · 2010-04-21 19:15:14

xf86-video-intel is on 2.11 but in xorg18 repo.

jimbok · 2010-04-21 19:18:19

One in AUR:

http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=22968

takedown · 2010-04-21 20:00:19

yes, yes, I know this PKGBUILD, I use it in the past, I only ask for xf86-video-intel in [extra]

takedown · 2010-04-21 20:02:01

wonder wrote:

xf86-video-intel is on 2.11 but in xorg18 repo.

ok
That's the answer I was looking...
but why not in extra? 2.11 need xorg 1.8?

Thanks wonder

Last edited by takedown (2010-04-21 20:02:47)

archman-cro · 2010-04-21 20:04:20

How come it's still not in [extra]? Packager is still testing/building it? Just asking and curious.
Btw, I'm happy with 2.10.

takedown · 2010-04-21 20:06:41

archman-cro wrote:

I'm happy with 2.10.

Mee to

wonder · 2010-04-21 20:10:39

takedown wrote:

wonder wrote:
xf86-video-intel is on 2.11 but in xorg18 repo.
ok
That's the answer I was looking...
but why not in extra? 2.11 need xorg 1.8?
Thanks wonder

that is how the maintainer decided, he knows better. maybe is depended by new mesa etc.

@archman-cro because is not ready. http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/19158 testing is not needed anymore to be enabled

Last edited by wonder (2010-04-21 20:13:07)

archman-cro · 2010-04-21 20:14:11

takedown, I think 2.11 doesn't require a xorg1.8, cause I've tried to "makepkg" the "newest" package and I get these deps required: xf86driproto>=2.1.0 ; glproto>=1.4.11.
Those two don't require any additional packs.

Cheers.

takedown · 2010-04-21 20:17:47

takedown wrote:

I understand that if I'd upgrade it, I can use ABS or AUR, but repeat, is simply a question.

I really don't need use 2.11. 2.10 work very very nice on my thinkpad.
I only would know why xf86-video-intel 2.11 don't hit extra

Last edited by takedown (2010-04-21 20:18:04)

archman-cro · 2010-04-21 20:23:13

Hehe, same thing here. Wonder pointed everything out.
Thanks.

oli · 2010-04-22 11:34:49

If nobody has a clue what's new in 2.11, why not read the changelog?

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/i … 06408.html

takedown · 2010-04-22 12:31:12

someone mentioned something about the list of changes?

oli · 2010-04-24 12:52:24

>someone mentioned something about the list of changes?

>but why not in extra? 2.11 need xorg 1.8?

Well, it could answer your question, otherwise I don't understand the silly notion about the missing update. Just because of the fun doing so?

>I really don't need use 2.11. 2.10 work very very nice on my thinkpad.

Some people do need this driver. Now they have at least some kind of information at all, than just "why there is no update?".

takedown · 2010-04-24 13:00:10

As stated at the outset, it was just a question I had.
You never had a doubt and used to ask those who may have the best answer?

The changelog does not answer my question, because basically he had already read and did not involve anything that undermines archlinux.

Because some people do need this driver. I ask: "why there is no update?"
Now they have at least some kind of information.

My question remains: Why the package xf86-video-intel Takes so long Without being updated?
perhaps a bug? maybe some dependency?

wonder · 2010-04-24 13:11:29

@takedown i already answer your question. the maintainer decided to update to 2.11 compiled against xorg18. Why is not xorg18 in repo? I linked to the do list.

takedown · 2010-04-24 14:29:20

Thank you.
It was my fault. I thought that it wasn't an affirmation. Rather a "maybe".

With my previous answer was not trying to attack anyone. But that answer didn't answer my question, I preferred to rinse.
Excuse me, but my English is a bit basic, I think it helps me to communicate, but sometimes it maybe misunderstand something.

Bye bye

Arch Linux

#1 2010-04-21 18:54:48

[solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#2 2010-04-21 19:15:14

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#3 2010-04-21 19:18:19

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#4 2010-04-21 20:00:19

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#5 2010-04-21 20:02:01

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#6 2010-04-21 20:04:20

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#7 2010-04-21 20:06:41

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#8 2010-04-21 20:10:39

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#9 2010-04-21 20:14:11

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#10 2010-04-21 20:17:47

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#11 2010-04-21 20:23:13

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#12 2010-04-22 11:34:49

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#13 2010-04-22 12:31:12

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#14 2010-04-24 12:52:24

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#15 2010-04-24 13:00:10

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#16 2010-04-24 13:11:29

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

#17 2010-04-24 14:29:20

Re: [solved] xf86-video-intel outdated

Board footer