Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arch Linux Revolts Against ATI Catalyst Driver

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by DestroyFX View Post
    You want thing working : STOP WHINING AND GO BUG REPORT (Detailed with log and any stuff useful... No whining on bugzilla please)
    http://ati.cchtml.com
    LOL, the problem has been reported upstream long ago. I know you are an ATI fanatic, well, that doesn't help, they have bad support for Linux period. They are improving, but the improvements are so slow that it might take a few years for them to release quality drivers like nvidia, and by then, the open source ati drivers hopefully will be better than the closed source one.

    Yeah, nvidia has its issues, but are not as catastrophic as ati. And we are not whining, we are telling our users that by the time xorg-server 1.6 goes to the main repository and ATI hasn't come up with a driver which fixes the issues we are experiencing, which are no non-multilib support, and the compatibility with newer xorg we will remove them. We are a true 64 bit OS, and we follow that philosophy, we have a lot of users content with that, is having that philosophy a crime? I guess not, in fact it supports better the future, which is 64 bit architecture.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
      That is far from the truth, if that was the case there would be no need for the retail versions nor the upgrade versions both of which sell well. What applies in the corporate/business sector does not apply in the home sector. People upgrade their OS's all the time. It happens in linux, OS X, windows, insert favorite OS here.
      It is not far from the truth, I know of people that are still using Windows 98 as their OS. Their needs are met by it, their firewalls still work as do their anti-viral solutions, they see no reason to upgrade, so they don't.

      Comment


      • #78
        Boy this is and old thread but I would just like to add my 2cents

        I am an Archlinux Lover. I have tried many other distro's (Ubuntu being the most used and it is vary good for what it is, Bloated) but I can't stand to use them anymore now that I have gotten a tast of what a Linux OS sould be like. Anyone who has not used Archlinux should try it out. Arch dose what you tell it to do, works and "Says Working". Unlike Ubuntu that just randomly brakes 90% of the time do to all the bloated packaged that I never use and the fact that it installs Every driver known to the Ubuntu dev's. Then 6 month latter the whole bug hunt starts agin. But, Ubuntu is the best distro if you know nothing about Linux.

        I messed up and thought that ATI had good Linux support. I feel like a dumbass now. ATI suport is a joke. The catalyst dosn't work in SUSE, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, which is clames to support, without major tweeking. This is no joke, the ATI catalyst is complet crap and there is no hope for it getting better.

        While it sucks that the Catalyst is not supported by Arch now and is left up to the comunity. I have the AUR package installed... That was not hard. The current maintainer has it set up nice and patched to work with 2.6.29 (Though Arch will be on 2.6.30 soon). The hard part was getting it to work. I first did it in Ubuntu becuase Ubuntu is officially supported. Learnd all the tricks to get it to work and then applied what I learnd to Archlinux. Now a month and a half latter I finaly found all the tweeks and pached Xserver and all this crap to get it to work.

        So, I was pissed at first but ATI needs a wake up call. Good for you Arch devs. Drop support, I don't expect you to have to deal with this POS catalyst. I am never buying ATI ever agin. I am not even going to buy AMD. I don't even care if I have to pay 10 times more for nVidia or AMD has some super cool CPU. Now, Intel that is a company to support. I love Intel as much as I love Arch
        Last edited by hunterthomson; 06-09-2009, 03:26 AM.

        Comment


        • #79
          You are being unfair to ATI/AMD
          Video part of linux, xorg, 3d and 2d stuff is a mess. Yes its a progressing mess, but it only means that driver devs need to keep up with changes in the mess.

          And in the end we win, because oss driver gets more attention.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by hunterthomson View Post
            I am and Archlinux Lover. I have tried many other distro's (Ubuntu being the most used and it is vary good for what it is, Bloated) but I can't stand to use them anymore now that I have gotten a tast of what a Linux OS sould be like. Anyone who has not used Archlinux should try it out. Arch dose what you tell it to do, works and "Says Working". Unlike Ubuntu that just randomly brakes 90% of the time do to all the bloated packaged that I never use and the fact that it installs Every driver known to the Ubuntu dev's. Then 6 month latter the whole bug hunt starts agin. But, Ubuntu is the best distro if you know nothing about Linux.

            I messed up and thought that ATI had good Linux support. I feel like a dumbass now. ATI suport is a joke. The catalyst dosn't work in SUSE, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, which is clames to support, without major tweeking. This is no joke, the ATI catalyst is complet crap and there is no hope for it getting better.

            While it sucks that the Catalyst is not supported by Arch now and is left up to the comunity. I have the AUR package installed... That was not hard. The current maintainer has it set up nice and patched to work with 2.6.29 (Though Arch will be on 2.6.30 soon). The hard part was getting it to work. I first did it in Ubuntu becuase Ubuntu is officially supported. Learnd all the tricks to get it to work and then applied what I learnd to Archlinux. Now a month and a half latter I finaly found all the tweeks and pached Xserver and all this crap to get it to work.

            So, I was pissed at first but ATI needs a wake up call. Good for you Arch devs. Drop support, I don't expect you to have to deal with this POS catalyst. I am never buying ATI ever agin. I am not even going to buy AMD. I don't even care if I have to pay 10 times more for nVidia or AMD has some super cool CPU. Now, Intel that is a company to support. I love Intel as much as I love Arch
            I agree 105 % the first part of your post. I have moved to Arch recently and I love it. Especially AUR

            But I don't at all have had those bad experiences with ati you got. Which gfx card do you have? My 3650 have always worked with Ubuntu, Suse and Arch without any problems installing it. Though I have had some struggle booting to X with Ubuntu without the option DefaultDepth 24.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by alec View Post
              You are being unfair to ATI/AMD
              Video part of linux, xorg, 3d and 2d stuff is a mess. Yes its a progressing mess, but it only means that driver devs need to keep up with changes in the mess.

              And in the end we win, because oss driver gets more attention.
              If it is so hard then why dose Intel never have a problem with Linux suport? All there drivers for Wireless, Graphics,... are always rock sold and upto date. ATI need to retool there drivers so they don't rely on stuff that is going to change in the next kernel or Xserver. They need to make it more modular so changes can be made with less effort.
              Last edited by hunterthomson; 06-09-2009, 03:47 AM.

              Comment


              • #82
                tball: I have a Mobility FireGL v5700 wich is a HD3650...
                Here is the suport thread I started on ubuntuforums for my laptop if you would like to see all the stuff I have to do to get it to work.
                http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1166667

                It looks simple now that I worte that thread but it took me over a month to figure it all out (the catalyst I just found the last few tweeks for) I consider having to use a patched Xserver a major tweek.

                But ya was to genoral about the catlayst not working. It dosn't work with my card with any of the suported distors with out major tweeking.

                But ya isn't Arch the s/h/i/t

                Note, the Intel wifi driver problem is not a problem with the driver it is a problem with Ubuntu. It works fine in Arch. Flash is also a problem in Ubuntu but works fine is Arch. In Ubuntu when I play video games like supertuxkart the game thinks I am pressing joydown all the time but in Arch that is not a problem
                Last edited by hunterthomson; 06-09-2009, 03:56 AM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by hunterthomson View Post
                  If it is so hard then why dose Intel never have a problem with Linux suport? All there drivers for Wireless, Graphics,... are always rock sold and upto date. ATI need to retool there drivers so they don't rely on stuff that is going to change in the next kernel or Xserver. They need to make it more modular so changes can be made with less effort.
                  ATI have probably done that as much as they can - but then we start getting into standardising interfaces, which the kernel devs don't like doing, and is one of the key issues of fglrx / kernel incompatibility. They probably do have support easily for new stuff, but due to their development cycle it'll bake for a month or two before being released (by which time things can change again). That's a con - a pro is that we get updated drivers every month!

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by mirv View Post
                    ATI have probably done that as much as they can - but then we start getting into standardising interfaces, which the kernel devs don't like doing, and is one of the key issues of fglrx / kernel incompatibility. They probably do have support easily for new stuff, but due to their development cycle it'll bake for a month or two before being released (by which time things can change again). That's a con - a pro is that we get updated drivers every month!
                    Hum..., standardizing is generally a good thing. I don't know the reasons why the kernel devs don't want to do it though. Maybe they have a good one. Although, Linux is Open Source. They can just look at the code and talk to the devs and make a driver that runs cherry on all distos. The Xserver and Kernel are not disto spisific. The file system layout is though, so ATI should have in place a way for distro's to easly set where stuff should be installed.

                    The release cycal should not be based on things Like Ubuntu's LTR cycle. They should base it on owe... every other kernel and every Xserver. Also, from what I remember reading, the arch dev in charge of calalyst support and on the mailling list didn't think they were addressing any of the problems that were making it so hard to work with. So, new catalyst driver update every month was probably just adding to the problem not solving it.
                    Last edited by hunterthomson; 06-09-2009, 04:47 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      As I understand it, kernel devs don't like standardizing the internal interfaces because they don't want to be put in a position where out-of-tree concerns end up holding more sway over the internal kernel architecture than in-tree concerns. They want to be free to reorganize, tear down and rebuild anything they think they can improve within the kernel, without being pressured to support every version of every interface going back a decade or more. OTOH they take standardization of userland<->kernel interfaces pretty seriously.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
                        As I understand it, kernel devs don't like standardizing the internal interfaces because they don't want to be put in a position where out-of-tree concerns end up holding more sway over the internal kernel architecture than in-tree concerns. They want to be free to reorganize, tear down and rebuild anything they think they can improve within the kernel, without being pressured to support every version of every interface going back a decade or more. OTOH they take standardization of userland<->kernel interfaces pretty seriously.
                        Ok, thanks for letting me know. I guess that is a good reason and being open source should make up for changes in the structure. I meen they should let everyone know ahead of time that they will be overhalling something.
                        Last edited by hunterthomson; 06-09-2009, 04:51 AM.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X