Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:23:42 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: Matt Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> Cc: aliovx@gmail.com, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: drm / drm2 removal in 12 Message-ID: <CANCZdfp2rf=5e-qTV=-4yFrLPugn0UhtYovXdesJWbRWAjdGTg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAPrugNqV6k2QTuiLerAKLB_hV1hkZNi4MLNqKU7MtVnMhMfPQw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPrugNr9wN63ANjTYzyrHRegr9KTk_OSTLfrt%2BhktCnfKX=_mg@mail.gmail.com> <20180824215302.ivfna55jtrtc5trg@freebsd480.station> <CAPrugNqV6k2QTuiLerAKLB_hV1hkZNi4MLNqKU7MtVnMhMfPQw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 4:20 PM Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 14:53 Ali <aliovx@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 06:54:54PM -0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > > > Just in case anyone misses the change to UPDATING: > > > > > > 20180821: > > > drm and drm2 have been removed. Users on powerpc, 32-bit > > hardware, > > > or with GPUs predating Radeon and i915 will need to install t= he > > > graphics/drm-legacy-kmod. All other users should be able to u= se > > > one of the LinuxKPI-based ports: graphics/drm-stable-kmod, > > > graphics/drm-next-kmod, graphics/drm-devel-kmod. > > > Note that this applies only to 12. > > > > I see that The removal of drm and drm2 has been reverted on svn. Could > > you please kindly share the reasons behind the re-inclusion? > > > > > I can=E2=80=99t really give the blow by blow of internal project drama, b= ut the > gist of it is that =E2=80=9Cbest practices=E2=80=9D (which are not yet ac= tually documented > anywhere that I=E2=80=99ve seen) were not followed with regards to the de= precation > process. Warner and others believe that we can address the objectives of > the drm removal (improving the user experience and communicating that > drm/drm2 are _completely_ unsupported apart from continuing to compile) > through less disruptive means. > Just so. Our only continued frustration is that we were never given any guidance by > RE or core on said =E2=80=9Cbest practices=E2=80=9D when the discussion w= as taking place in > May and then those groups behaved as if this were a surprise when the > removal happened. I=E2=80=99m cautiously optimistic that this well expedi= te > improving communications on those matters. > All the problems that are exposed by this aren't technical. This one is social, but no less important. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANCZdfp2rf=5e-qTV=-4yFrLPugn0UhtYovXdesJWbRWAjdGTg>