AMD 8.36.5 Driver -- The Still no fglrx AIGLX Support Edition

[d2kx]

What AGP problems?

I hope 8.37 will be released today... or tomorrow. But I think we'll have to wait till next week

[niniendowarrior]

It's really some time ago. Months... I reckon. I upgraded my driver and then fglrx would complain something about my AGP. Whatever. I couldn't get 3D acceleration ever again. Ever. Dropping to older versions didn't help at all. No support, no nothing. So, there is my good for nothing graphics card sitting there and me hoping for drivers that do work.

[time2IPL]

... I couldn't get 3D acceleration ever again. Ever. ...

In the process of trying to get the f%$&*! drivers working I trashed my X11 setup; I'm using FC6 64-bit. I had read several places that I should build a kernel without kernel DRM/DRI support && also make sure I had the nVidia drivers installed for my board (I'm using a Gigabyte GA-M55Plus-S3G (v1.0)) motherboard which has the Ge-Force 430 chipset on it) - you can probably pretty much guessed what happened; the nVidia driver install has pretty much trashed my X installation.

Can anyone give me some tips on how to remove && reinstall X? I'm assuming I'm going to need it and mesa; I've downloaded all the current RPMs for both. The server's made up of at least 50 different RPMS though; I don't particularly want to trash this installation and start agin (either on purpose or by accident) and my best guess is to forcibly remove & (re)install all of the RPMs yum & RPM show are installed on it now; I'm concerned that I'll miss something though.

Thanks very much,
Larry Morley

BTW Michael, if you're back in town, and have the time to go into the differences between the drivers from 8.32.5 and upwards, I'd really appreciate it; I've confirmed that there are, in fact, differences between where the installer puts libraries etc. on my system between driver versions. Thanks.

[d2kx]

I hope fglrx 8.37 comes today... and they better have AT LEAST Xorg 1.3 Support.

[Michael]

I hope fglrx 8.37 comes today... and they better have AT LEAST Xorg 1.3 Support.

Phoronix.com will be immediately adopting Fedora 7 once released (next week) to replace existing Fedora Core 6 and Fedora 7 Test 4 installations. Fedora 7 uses X.Org 1.3

[d2kx]

Thanks for the information without breaking your AMD-Betatester-NDA Now try to do the same with the release date

[time2IPL]

Hi, Michael -

Just wondering if you were back in town and had a spare few to answer the questions I had had regarding changes in the drivers from 8.32.5 to all versions > 8.32.5; I'm still having the same problem(s), now with more machines.

I've taken this as far as I can go without the benefit of your assistance (as packager of the drivers) or some other rather deep technical insight. At this point, I really need to resolve this - somehow. I posted another summary regarding the latest system that won't work with any driver > 8.32.5; it's a completely different system, card, etc. than my others; about the only thing they have in common is FC6 (and its X server, etc.).

Thanks in advance for your help,
Larry Morley

[Michael]

Yes, I am now back from JavaOne and almost caught up in all the work.

In 8.32.5 was the 2.6.19 support in the mainstream code, switching from using system-config-display to aticonfig for the X configuration. In 8.33.6 atiogl_a_dri.so was removed since that was a blob related to R200 that was removed from the driver itself. /etc/ati/control was also introduced mainstream in that version.

In 8.34 was Fedora 7 support with a Linux 2.6.20 patch (temporary). In 8.35 fireglcontrolpanel was removed and then linked to the new Catalyst Control Center.

Then in 8.36 the Linux 2.6.20 patch was removed along with adding esut.a and glesx.so..

[time2IPL]

Yes, I am now back from JavaOne and almost caught up in all the work.

First, thanks for getting back to me; I know how much of a joy it is trying to get caught up (or kept up). Second, thanks for the history; hopefully, it'll help explain what happened.

I verified again that the version 8.33.6 is the one where X on the systems I'm trying to get working here go off into the weeds upon attempting to load libfglrxdrm.so. That's consistent with the fact that the server starts up (albeit without DRI/DRM support) if I make libfglrxdrm.so unavailable. The problem has occurred with every Radeon X1600 (R500 based) I've tried, and also with two 9800s (R350 based AGP cards). In all cases the OS was FC6, and version 8.32.5 of the driver works.

Tried mixing peices of different driver versions (eg., to see if adding back in atiogl would allow the driver to work, etc.); but, the X server detected the version mismatch and wouldn't load.

So, at this point, it would appear that the question is one of "what do several X1600 / R500 cards and two Radeon 9800's (R350) have in common with the 200's, so much so that removing a chunk of code to support one would affect the other?" As far as I can tell, the code for libfglrxdrm isn't published, so there's not much I can do there...

It almost has to be something simple. Either that, or I'm missing something that's dead obvious. Either way, I would love to know what's going on.

What I was seeing with respect to file locations seems to be related to how the driver is instaled (eg., as a module, or as a group of RPMs). I hecked that again too, and there are quite a few differences as fa rwhere

Does anything at all spring to mind? This iust too bizarre.

Thanks again,
Larry

[Michael]

Is there any errors in your Xorg.0.log or anything "weird" in your xorg.conf? I have done at least 50 new Fedora installs since 8.32 and haven't run into a issue like you describe.