Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030438AbVJEXgo (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:36:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030439AbVJEXgo (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:36:44 -0400 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.203]:62394 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030438AbVJEXgn convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:36:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sNfkfPM3mSJKMiDBfJAv3M5hpRfkLQWoNjMulpGntBc0Ve1ZIiXYneyAqAfSfLjBr57zAUcuOnNYxDaFV3YU7gF0pgsPUXjbIdZSL9k52FYOKBXvFxfuTmMx9/M20depkUVjxa15T3SEvBDJZe2OHDJqw43eDDTjBv9fwui+Qgo= Message-ID: <21d7e9970510051636g29012748o77124c1c1abc9259@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 09:36:42 +1000 From: Dave Airlie Reply-To: Dave Airlie To: Nix Subject: Re: Why no XML in the Kernel? Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <8764sbwoj7.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <20051002094142.65022.qmail@web51012.mail.yahoo.com> <35fb2e590510021153r254b7eb0haf9f9e365bed051e@mail.gmail.com> <87oe66r62s.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> <20051003153515.GW7992@ftp.linux.org.uk> <87zmpqbcws.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> <21d7e9970510051411y2f2871a7mafa2e96cce277657@mail.gmail.com> <87br23odls.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> <21d7e9970510051557u42ae32f0rca46e951c5da536f@mail.gmail.com> <8764sbwoj7.fsf@amaterasu.srvr.nix> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 939 Lines: 21 > > Ah. So, er, the DRM<-> userspace protocol is stable, then? > > Looks like I was working on bad assumptions (assuming the DRM and X were > tied). I'm not sure where those assumptions came from. Possibly just > that they shared a CVS repo, although I'd hope I'd had more evidence > than that. I realy can't recall. In theory yes, on occasion I do get bugs that break XFree86 4.3, but these are bugs as opposed to design decisions, upgrading the kernel should never require upgrading to a new version of X or anything like that, however upgrading X can sometimes require a newer kernel in order to take advantage of newer drm features.. but X should always work with the older drms... Dave. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/