Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Catalyst 10.1 seems to be out

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

  • #16
    Are they kidding us? The 9.12 hotfix is newer than 10-1. I'm not even going to install this version but continue to use 9.12 hotfix with the old control and signature files.

    And to play a nice joke, December 11th... 2 months they have just been neglecting their driver. April fools only occurs on the first of April, but ATI/AMD has managed to play this game with us every month.

    EDIT: I'm really beginning to think ATI is using a primitive version control system. With git, they could have easily merged the new bits from the Catalyst 9.12 hot fix without any confusing code conflicts. What are they using, notepad with cut and paste? nVidia mentioned their use of Perforce, which I believe Linux was developed on until Linus developed git, maybe ATI should switch to one of the two?

    But honestly, something must be very wrong at the company if they have to test the _built_ version (not even merging minor fixes) of their module for 2 months. Most development processes allow for the incremental merging of bug/security fixes up until the last date (release candidate or feature freeze style), where it's usually built one last time and shipped the same day.

    Am I wrong? Could someone explain why this couldn't be a bad thing?
    Last edited by damentz; 01-27-2010, 08:19 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      The hotfix has got only a newer build date, this driver is in theory newer as it is based on another branch - 8.69 instead of 8.68.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by krionius View Post
        Still no support for the HD Mobility 5xxx series?

        When should I expect this to get in?

        oh, why did i dare to buy an ATi product again! I had an ati 9600xt back then. I'm such a stupid-stupid...

        So here I'm without an OSS driver and without closed source too. Vesa what I got under Linux, yeah. Thank you...........
        Same here, I had a 9800np, how stupid am I(now a 5850)? Very I guess, shame on me this time shame on me.

        Comment


        • #19
          Maybe you are lucky and get first oss drivers for hd 5 within 2 weeks (FOSDEM).

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by sc3252 View Post
            Same here, I had a 9800np, how stupid am I(now a 5850)? Very I guess, shame on me this time shame on me.
            No matter how stupid you think you are, there's always someone dumberer. In this case, me.

            It took a mobility 9800, X850XT, X1800XT and about a week of trying to get tv out to work with a X300 before I finally learned my lesson.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Melcar View Post
              It's not EXA or anything like it. Something else entirely.
              i do not say its exa... something like exa...

              whatever it makes 2D faster... and its not so outdatet like XAA...

              Comment


              • #22
                But it's nothing "like" EXA. They're using something completely different. And the way things are at the moment, it will take some time for the new accel. method to be ready and proper. I really doubt it will be the default by 10.2 or even 10.3.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Anyone interested, this seems to work with the mobility hd 5xxx,at least my 5650 is working with it. Needs manual xorg.conf and give a transparent icon in X bottom right corner telling Unsupported hw). Check the other thread for more.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    here we go again...
                    Code:
                    dpkg-shlibdeps: error: couldn't find library libatiuki.so.1 needed by debian/xorg-driver-fglrx/usr/lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfglrxdrm.so (ELF format: 'elf64-x86-64'; RPATH: '').
                    Have to look at it later when I have more time...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Hmm almost the same error as cutterjohn.
                      --buildpkg Mandriva/2010.0 rpm's build without issue (64bit) but cannot install
                      Code:
                      - x11-driver-video-fglrx-8.690-1amd.mdv2010.0.x86_64 (due to unsatisfied libatiuki.so.1()(64bit))
                      Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
                      Ben Franklin 1755

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Of course package generation for Debian Squeeze is broken. Tried 'testing' too, of course it's also broken.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Useless effort anyway as the xserver in Debian testing is not supported.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Kano View Post
                            Useless effort anyway as the xserver in Debian testing is not supported.
                            I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly do you base this on?

                            Currently under Squeeze I'm running:
                            xserver-xorg 1:7.4+4
                            xserver-xorg-core 2:1.6.5-1

                            The Catalyst 10.1 Release Notes require:
                            XOrg 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 or 7.4

                            Granted I haven't built X from source in a very long time and the current numbering scheme is less than clear, but these bits seem to indicate I have a 7.4 xorg version which the 10.1 Release Notes identify.

                            Ok, you might say the core server is unsupported. Ubuntu Karmic is supported by Catalyst 10.1, yes? If we look at the package xserver-xorg (1:7.4+3ubuntu7) we see a core server requirement of xserver-xorg-core (>= 2:1.5.99.901). In fact the Karmic core server is 1.6.4.

                            So it looks like the squeeze Xorg is just a hair newer than Karmic's. In fact based on Karmic's xserver-xorg-core requirement 1.6.5 should work.

                            Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, but based on this info I'm just not reaching the same conclusion.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by nbi1 View Post
                              I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly do you base this on?

                              Currently under Squeeze I'm running:
                              xserver-xorg 1:7.4+4
                              xserver-xorg-core 2:1.6.5-1

                              The Catalyst 10.1 Release Notes require:
                              XOrg 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 or 7.4

                              Granted I haven't built X from source in a very long time and the current numbering scheme is less than clear, but these bits seem to indicate I have a 7.4 xorg version which the 10.1 Release Notes identify.

                              Ok, you might say the core server is unsupported. Ubuntu Karmic is supported by Catalyst 10.1, yes? If we look at the package xserver-xorg (1:7.4+3ubuntu7) we see a core server requirement of xserver-xorg-core (>= 2:1.5.99.901). In fact the Karmic core server is 1.6.4.

                              So it looks like the squeeze Xorg is just a hair newer than Karmic's. In fact based on Karmic's xserver-xorg-core requirement 1.6.5 should work.
                              I just confirmed that the squeeze 1.6.5 core xserver works just fine under Karmic. Even with the 1.6.4 Radeon driver. Apparently 1.6.4 and 1.6.5 aren't so different as to cause problems. Which leads me to believe the fglrx from Catalyst 10.1 would be just fine for squeeze if I could only build it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                It's even newer than lucid and since about 5 months fglrx does not work with Xserver 1.7.x. Ask some Fedora users

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X