[Bug 21515] VENDOR_WINE vs VENDOR_ATI with xf86-video-ati

wine-bugs at winehq.org wine-bugs at winehq.org
Thu Feb 25 08:55:16 CST 2010


Cùran <debian at carbon-project.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
  Attachment #26299|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #84 from Cùran <debian at carbon-project.org>  2010-02-25 08:55:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=26478)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=26478)
Patch series from attachment 26299 refreshed for 1.1.39

(In reply to comment #79)
I've refreshed the patch series again to apply cleanly on top of 1.1.39. I've
attached the current version to this comment. The attached version of the patch
series is applied to the Wine packages available from
<http://dev.carbon-project.org/debian/wine-unstable/> (binary and source
packages available in case somebody else likes to try it) and can be found in
the debian/patches directory (in wine-unstable_1.1.39-0.1.debian.tar.bz2).
With regard to the wrong capabilities detection: Is there something I can do to
help get the correct detection into Wine?

(In reply to comment #80)
> Hmm. Regarding vidmem, Since it's defined as an unsigned int, I'm wondering
> if that could be an issue with int size on amd64.
Just FYI: all R300 tests I've run were done on i386.

Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

More information about the wine-bugs mailing list