Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67

Thread: Ubuntu Will Not Enable Open-Source VDPAU Support

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrecorreia View Post
    another non theme. windows don t come with drivers pre installer, if you need it install yourself, if you will install nvidia non free(almost every people who use nvidia) vdpau installs, intel use vaapi. amd... well no buy amd hardware
    windows does come with drivers preinstalled, alot of them actualy. mouse GPU chipsets and the list goes on and on

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    276

    Default

    This is Bullsh!t, if they don't want VDPAU in the livecd, they just don't install it. If I'm reading correctly, zgreg asked for VDPAU in the repos, and they gave him a retarded excuse.
    I guess the real reason is that debian has NOT enabled it ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=656719 ), and ubuntu won't do it until debian does... which is also stupid. Seriously, if they want to benefit their users, both distros SHOULD enable VDPAU, OpenCL ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=717500 ), video encoding, etc. They should have done it when they were asked to do it. We ubuntu and debian users should pressure them to do it. This is one of the most stupid things I've seen: having a really good driver crippled, and they are NOT giving us their (real) reasons.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdfblah View Post
    This is Bullsh!t, if they don't want VDPAU in the livecd, they just don't install it. If I'm reading correctly, zgreg asked for VDPAU in the repos, and they gave him a retarded excuse.
    I guess the real reason is that debian has NOT enabled it ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=656719 ), and ubuntu won't do it until debian does... which is also stupid. Seriously, if they want to benefit their users, both distros SHOULD enable VDPAU, OpenCL ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=717500 ), video encoding, etc. They should have done it when they were asked to do it. We ubuntu and debian users should pressure them to do it. This is one of the most stupid things I've seen: having a really good driver crippled, and they are NOT giving us their (real) reasons.
    +1
    stuff like this should be a no brainer, its critical and should be enabled.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    76

    Default not stable enough ?

    The argument of the size is weak but I have tested and disabled vdpau with an rv740 several times. It doesn't crash often but it does it regularly.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    22

    Default

    Kind of a noob question but does this mean when VDPAU is not enabled there is no harware accelerated video decoding at all (eg. when watching a movie through VLC) ?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    258

    Default

    In the meantime, on Fedora it just takes a "yum install mesa-vdpau-drivers"

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdfblah View Post
    This is Bullsh!t, if they don't want VDPAU in the livecd, they just don't install it. If I'm reading correctly, zgreg asked for VDPAU in the repos, and they gave him a retarded excuse.
    I guess the real reason is that debian has NOT enabled it ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=656719 ), and ubuntu won't do it until debian does... which is also stupid. Seriously, if they want to benefit their users, both distros SHOULD enable VDPAU, OpenCL ( https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugr...cgi?bug=717500 ), video encoding, etc. They should have done it when they were asked to do it. We ubuntu and debian users should pressure them to do it. This is one of the most stupid things I've seen: having a really good driver crippled, and they are NOT giving us their (real) reasons.
    While I agree that they should include it, if Debian has valid reasons for not including it, Ubuntu will probably respect that regardless.

    In this case I think it's to avoid dependency hell.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29

    Default

    8MB will make it "too big to download"? I call BS.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by profoundWHALE View Post
    While I agree that they should include it, if Debian has valid reasons for not including it, Ubuntu will probably respect that regardless.

    In this case I think it's to avoid dependency hell.
    AFAIK, they just need a maintainer.
    To me, as an Ubuntu user, this is absurd... because Ubuntu has its own team for mesa.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    139

    Default

    Why is everyone saying it's as simple as enabling a configuration option? It's not. If they ship it, they have to support it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •