[Bug 230298] graphics/mesa-dri: update to 18.2.3

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=230298

Jan Beich <jbeich at FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|graphics/mesa-dri: update   |graphics/mesa-dri: update
                   |to 18.2.2                   |to 18.2.3

--- Comment #12 from Jan Beich <jbeich at FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #9)
> The rationale for the rejection seems clear to me: He's stated that the new
> MESA hasn't been tested.

- there was public call for testing on ports@ + x11@ mailing lists; only 1 user
heeded it but didn't confirm if anything has regressed or not (compared to have
never worked on the specific hardware/drm version)
- x11@ team QA is opaque i.e., not clear how their testing is better or why
shoving patches to an external repo would magically attract testers

> There's efforts under way to get a test suite in place to rectify that
> problem.

How a test suite is going to help with the lack of GPU variety? IIRC, one of
the *former* x11@ peers had a lab of hardware to test things against but didn't
last long as such a job isn't fun for a volunteer.

> and there's been no articulated reasons why a new version is needed.

- New hardware support
- Support for newer OpenGL versions
- Better Vulkan support
- Better support for new LLVM versions 
- Upstream support
  (Mesa 18.1.* reached EOL after 18.2.1 release;
   LLVM 6 reached EOL after LLVM 7 release)

FreeBSD only has one Mesa version in ports tree atm, and it has to support
everything: from ancient hardware on the oldest FreeBSD version to the shiny
new stuff on -CURRENT. Old users maybe complacent with what little features
FreeBSD currently provides but new users want more, often stuff available as a
given on Linux. Perfect stability is hard to reach without telemetry, anyway.

> This close to a FreeBSD release, we should be conservative in how we approach
> this and make sure things work.

MFH to 2018Q4 isn't planned here. Are you implying FreeBSD 12.0 will not ship
before 2019Q1? Otherwise, /quarterly is a moving target and keeping POLA while
backporting regressions is a usual occurence but the state is reset each
cycle/quarter (along with binary packages).

(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #10)
> Confusing that you set maintainer feedback to '+' for this, but there you go.

maintainer-approval is an attachment flag unlike maintainer-feedback which is a
bug flag. Mesa 18.2 is a moving target, so there's no attachment. I've
requested review (not approval) since the first RC to give x11@ team plenty of
time but so far have received only some homework questions that don't count as
review, much less testing.

(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #11)
> Also, migrating to a new version of MESA may muddy the waters for the drm to ports conversion we're undergoing,

drm-legacy-kmod doesn't support FreeBSD < 12, so this has always been the case.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.