DRM removal soon

[Steve Kargl]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 11:22:52AM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote:
> On February 28, 2019 11:15:11 AM PST, Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:49:51AM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote:
> >> >
> >> The ports work as advertised.  IMO graphics/drm-legacy should be
> >> depreciated sooner than later. I would expect the graphics team
> >> could better spend their time and energy on drm-current, which
> >> btw works perfectly on my old laptop converted to i386 testbed,
> >> than maintaining old bitrot. When can we expect drm-legacy to
> >> finally be removed from ports?
> >> 
> >
> >drm-legacy-kmd has already been *depreciated*?
> >
> >Perhaps, you meant deprecated.  :)
> >
> >Hopefully, never.  drm-current-kmod locks up my laptop.
> >drm-legacy-kmod works.
> 
> Yes. drm-legacy-kmod should be removed from ports sooner
> than later. drm-current-kind works perfectly on older gear
> like my 13 year old Pentium-M, which was repurposed as an
> i386 test platform years ago.

Great drm-current-kmod works for you.
drm-current-kmod DOES NOT work on my i386 laptop.

> The reason to remove old software from base is evident.
> The same reason holds for ports as well. The ports team
> are also a limited resource. 

The drm-legacy-kmod port works.  It would never have been
broken (and it would be unneeded) if the *working* drm2 code
in base were never disconnected from the build.  The
drm-legacy-kmod port would not have been broken for a month
if an exp-run were done when modifications to pmap.h had
been done.

I get it.  drm-current-kmod works for you, so lets penalize
everyone else by removing working code. 

-- 
Steve