Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

undefined symbol: pciNumBuses (in 9.1 driver version)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Agreed, but that is changing pretty quickly as the open source framework evolves.

    Comment


    • #17
      As I undestand things : ATI/AMD is pushing ahead and communicating a lot around the opensource drivers which is a really good thing. A lot of promising things are going to happen with the growth of the community and the developpers / testers / users.

      However, I'm pragmatic as Kano is. I have a radeon hd3470 graphic card, and the actual 2D and 3D support for this chip by the open source drivers (radeon / radeonhd drivers) is still very basic. No full 2D material acceleration and no 3D support yet (announced to be released in a stable version in 3 months or more)

      On the over side the commercial (closed source) driver (fglrx) keeps on evolving and providing more and more fonctionnalities (opengl 3.0 support, etc.). I'm sure a lot of people are involved to make the fglrx driver better.

      Consedering this, I think that ATI/AMD shouldn't forget their linux users and also provide support for the fglrx driver with the latest xorg versions till the open source fill the gap with the fglrx driver.

      My 2 cents...

      Comment


      • #18
        Once the open source drivers get up to GL2-ish level and decent performance, do you still see a use case for fglrx on bleeding edge/pre-release distros (other than testing fglrx on the pre-release distro, of course ) ? For the next year or so the cool stuff in each new distro release is probably going to need open source drivers to run, like KMS in F10.

        We thought it made more sense to put the resources into advancing open source driver support more quickly. Maybe that's not right ?
        Last edited by bridgman; 02-04-2009, 08:49 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bridgman View Post
          We thought it made more sense to put the resources into advancing open source driver support more quickly. Maybe that's not right ?
          I think you're absolutely spot on to advance the open source drivers. I look around at GEM, Kernel Mode Setting and wonder what else is around the corner. New Fedora and Ubuntu releases will be sitting on top of these new features. Only the open source drivers will adapt fast enough to these radical new features. FGLRX can come along later once things settle down for those folks who need maximum speed and stability on Long-term support releases. Of course, I'll be happier once we see Framebuffer Object (FBO) support in the open source drivers.
          Last edited by Nexus6; 02-05-2009, 05:00 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Hi

            Don't misunderstand me
            I really think open source drivers is the way to go and that you should continue to put maximum resources on these driver development.
            As I said in my previous message, when the open source driver will be more mature then there will be no need of the fglrx driver anymore.

            I would like to thank all the people who make the open source driver evolving.

            Now I thought that as the fglrx driver is more advanced it would take less time and effort to get xorg 1.6 support which seems to be wrong.

            Comment


            • #21
              Moving to new xorg and kernel versions either stays the same or gets harder, unfortunately. The ease of moving to a new environment is mostly a function of how much of the environment you use, and that tends to grow with driver evolution if anything.

              Comment

              Working...
              X