| Author |
Message |
|
|
Post subject: ubuntu8.10 fglrx module source with kernel 2.6.27-4.slh.5
 Posted: Nov 04, 2008 - 05:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Posts: 225
Status: Offline
|
|
it works. I do have back my direct rendering. GoogleEarth works great again.
But the installed fglrx-kernel-2.6.27-4.slh.5-r1.deb announces itself broken:
fglrx-driver 8.52 not available |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: ubuntu8.10 fglrx module source with kernel 2.6.27-4.slh.
Posted: Nov 04, 2008 - 05:56 PM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 1905
Status: Offline
|
|
Good reason for not installing ubuntu stuff on sidux  |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: sidux request
Posted: Nov 04, 2008 - 05:57 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Posts: 225
Status: Offline
|
|
did not install but used the source to compile the module. The resulting fglx.ko works great.
The request to sidux is:
Take the fglrx-kernel-source from ubuntu8.10 and package it for sidux.
You can not expect arriving a working fglrx-source coming soon from debian sid: This will be kept back as they work with kernel 2.6.26 as long as lenny is not released. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 04, 2008 - 06:54 PM
|
|
Team Member
Joined: Nov 24, 2006
Posts: 1986
Location: w3
Status: Offline
|
|
|
ralul wrote:
The request to sidux is:
Take the fglrx-kernel-source from ubuntu8.10 and package it for sidux.
Feel free to do that - but do not expect a sidux team member doing that.
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
64bit stuff for sidux
development is life - code.zikula.org
an operating system must operate - sidux.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 04, 2008 - 10:47 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 10, 2008
Posts: 225
Status: Offline
|
|
And do not expect me referring to sidux as a real distribution.
sidux has the greatest live cd but furthermore ... |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 12:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 19, 2006
Posts: 1029
Status: Offline
|
|
| ralul, Please take your back handed remarks elsewhere, and join people who share your viewpoint instead of inciting those who are proud of the community they are part of. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 12:51 AM
|
|
Team Member
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 1959
Location: underworld
Status: Offline
|
|
|
kelmo wrote:
ralul, Please take your back handed remarks elsewhere, and join people who share your viewpoint instead of inciting those who are proud of the community they are part of.
DoubleDitto |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 01:24 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 02, 2006
Posts: 1034
Location: East Coast
Status: Offline
|
|
| Before someone ask why the flgrx module can't be in sidux out of the box, I want to remind them that sidux only ships legally free to distribute packages, whereas fglrx is a non-free package |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 07:02 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 20, 2007
Posts: 31
Status: Offline
|
|
| besides that -fglrx works with DebianSid kernel not with the sidux-kernel as the siduxmanual says.... |
_________________
sidux ich versuch wieder mein Glück!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 08:53 AM
|
|
Team Member
Joined: Nov 24, 2006
Posts: 1986
Location: w3
Status: Offline
|
|
The ongoing problems fglrx has since many years with almost every new kernel are probably the best and most prominent example for why closed source drivers are wrong from a technical point of view. So, even if you do not care for legal reasons (as we as distributors have to do), you need to understand that only the manufacturer is at fault when his closed source blob is buggy. Tracking and reverse-engineering pseudo-fixes for those bugs is a non-rewarding, boring and exhausting job - and a never ending story as long as the driver remains closed source. Those are the reasons for what I said above.
If someone does not like to recommend sidux - well, that's ok with me, too.
Greetings,
Chris |
_________________
64bit stuff for sidux
development is life - code.zikula.org
an operating system must operate - sidux.com
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 08:35 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 28, 2006
Posts: 4279
Status: Offline
|
|
|
Quote:
Tracking and reverse-engineering pseudo-fixes for those bugs is a non-rewarding, boring and exhausting job - and a never ending story as long as the driver remains closed source.
Let me confirm this as the person who actually has tried to track fglrx, it is exactly as slam says.
Also, I might add, ubuntu 8.10 was released with no working non free nvidia driver support (because of xorg 1.5), that support is only now available in beta form, and only if you use the direct .run binary packages from nvidia.
And as already noted, with the Sid 2.6.26 kernel, you can run fglrx fine I believe, though I don't actively track it any longer because of the issues and problems slam points out.
Anyone who thinks that tracking fglrx is a good way to spend one's time in this finite life we are all given, clearly does not value their time/life at all, or is getting paid to do that work. |
_________________
sidux Maintenance script: dist-upgrade, kernel install, general utilities: smxi
Backup script [using rdiff-backup]: rd-h2.sh
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: sidux request
Posted: Nov 05, 2008 - 09:43 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 520
Location: Griffith NSW Australia
Status: Offline
|
|
|
h2 wrote:
...
Anyone who thinks that tracking fglrx is a good way to spend one's time in this finite life we are all given, clearly does not value their time/life at all, or is getting paid to do that work.
feel free to scratch that "or is getting paid to do that work." too |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
