GNU bug report logs - #64528
[PATCH] gnu: mesa: Fix Vulkan on older Intel GPUs.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: John Kehayias <john.kehayias <at> protonmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Lilah Tascheter <lilah <at> lunabee.space>, 64528 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, iyzsong <at> envs.net
Subject: [bug#64528] [PATCH v2] gnu: mesa: Fix Vulkan on older Intel GPUs.
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 21:25:57 +0000

Hi Liliana,

On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 08:28 PM, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Am Sonntag, dem 16.07.2023 um 18:06 +0000 schrieb John Kehayias:
>> Ah, sorry I didn't see and respond earlier as we have a mesa-updates
>> branch that I'm just waiting for the go ahead to merge to master. It
>> updates mesa and is already built on Cuirass.
>>
>> How can we ensure that upon merging we don't cause the full rebuild?
>> Should I revert this, apply the updates, and then do this graft? Or
>> will applying the update on top of this graft commit be okay too?
> Since this graft is phrased as more or less a package transformation, I
> would expect it to still apply (more or less) on top of any update you
> do on mesa-updates.  If you already fixed the package on mesa-updates,
> then you can simply drop the replacement during your regular merge of
> master into mesa-updates.  Similarly, if you want to do away with the
> graft, but haven't done so yet, you can inline the changes after the
> merge.  In either case, it should be done before mesa-updates gets
> pushed to master.
>

I added a new commit on mesa-updates (after rebasing on master) to
ungraft, incorporating this change in mesa directly now.

>> My original thought was that this shouldn't be grafted but can just
>> be applied directly to mesa-updates with the next round of patches
>> there, as this one is already built. This could be done pretty
>> quickly, though I expect a new mesa version soon that I would group
>> this with, along with some other mass rebuild changes waiting. I
>> think on the order of a couple or few weeks.
>>
>> What do we all think? (Sorry there is no mesa team as of yet, not
>> sure how to set that up without it applying to a too large scope of
>> packages by default.)
> I think grafting this for now, but undoing the graft on mesa-updates is
> the way to go.  In my humble opinion we should fix bugs on master as
> they arise while doing long-term solutions in teams where we have more
> resources for big builds.
>

Sure, sounds good. I ended up updating mesa again along with a few
other patches and somewhat related updates; letting things rebuild now
and hope to merge to master once that looks good.

Thanks!
John

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.