Updated and Optimized Ubuntu Free Graphics Drivers

[Ruediix]

I was wondering, does this archive on Xenial link against the HWE versions or standard versions for packages not included.

Also, could you simply include the whole Xorg System to resolve this problem? It has a nasty tendency to create dependency hell otherwise.

[oibaf]

I was wondering, does this archive on Xenial link against the HWE versions or standard versions for packages not included.

Also, could you simply include the whole Xorg System to resolve this problem? It has a nasty tendency to create dependency hell otherwise.

I suppose it links against original packages that are managed by launchpad PPA. I prefer don't modify that since it may cause other issues that I cannot debug not having a xenial system to test. You may want to upgrade to a newer Ubuntu to get updated packages.

[Ruediix]

I suppose it links against original packages that are managed by launchpad PPA. I prefer don't modify that since it may cause other issues that I cannot debug not having a xenial system to test. You may want to upgrade to a newer Ubuntu to get updated packages.

Yeah, the only problem is the AMDGPU driver now requires a newer XOrg version than is in the older packages. It only properly works with the version that would be in the HWE version. Hence you probably should link Xenial against the HWE version in the Xenial PPA set.

I'm sure you are aware how HWE versions are used in the LTS releases. Starting around the xx.03 version they switch to use HWE by default, hence you should probably switch your Xenial version to link to those if you aren't packaging your own.

[oibaf]

Yeah, the only problem is the AMDGPU driver now requires a newer XOrg version than is in the older packages. It only properly works with the version that would be in the HWE version. Hence you probably should link Xenial against the HWE version in the Xenial PPA set.

I'm sure you are aware how HWE versions are used in the LTS releases. Starting around the xx.03 version they switch to use HWE by default, hence you should probably switch your Xenial version to link to those if you aren't packaging your own.

If someone send me a patch for the package(s) I can apply it. Unfortunately I don't have free time to do this myself currently.

[Ruediix]

If someone send me a patch for the package(s) I can apply it. Unfortunately I don't have free time to do this myself currently.

I've currently got a bad toothache (one more filling and it should be fixed) and backed housework keeping me from getting productive work done. I might add it to my "possible project" list. It would be a good one to get under my belt.

[DarkFoss]

Just a heads up to anyone trying to install the ppa from a clean install of Artful 17.10 daily. Ubuntu seems to have added an extra dependency to libdrm2 that can leave the upgrade broken.
From apt-cache show :

Package: libdrm2
Architecture: amd64
Version: 2.4.82-1
Multi-Arch: same
Priority: standard
Section: libs
Source: libdrm
Origin: Ubuntu
Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <[email protected]>
Original-Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <[email protected]>
Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug
Installed-Size: 110
[B]Depends: libdrm-common (>= 2.4.82-1), libc6 (>= 2.17)[/B]
Filename: pool/main/libd/libdrm/libdrm2_2.4.82-1_amd64.deb

sudo dpkg --purge libdrm-common will allow the upgrade to continue as oibaf's libdrm2 only depends on libc6.

[oibaf]

Just a heads up to anyone trying to install the ppa from a clean install of Artful 17.10 daily. Ubuntu seems to have added an extra dependency to libdrm2 that can leave the upgrade broken.
From apt-cache show :

Package: libdrm2
Architecture: amd64
Version: 2.4.82-1
Multi-Arch: same
Priority: standard
Section: libs
Source: libdrm
Origin: Ubuntu
Maintainer: Ubuntu Developers <[email protected]>
Original-Maintainer: Debian X Strike Force <[email protected]>
Bugs: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug
Installed-Size: 110
[B]Depends: libdrm-common (>= 2.4.82-1), libc6 (>= 2.17)[/B]
Filename: pool/main/libd/libdrm/libdrm2_2.4.82-1_amd64.deb

sudo dpkg --purge libdrm-common will allow the upgrade to continue as oibaf's libdrm2 only depends on libc6.

I rebased my packages, they should be build in a hour and this issue should hopefully be fixed.

[DarkFoss]

Thanks for the quick response. New error trying to install libdrm-common without purging first:

$ sudo apt-get install libdrm-common
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree      
Reading state information... Done
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  libdrm-common
0 upgraded, 1 newly installed, 0 to remove and 2 not upgraded.
Need to get 0 B/13.1 kB of archives.
After this operation, 38.9 kB of additional disk space will be used.
(Reading database ... 151739 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../libdrm-common_2.4.83+git1709261752.7c7118~gd~a_all.deb ...
Unpacking libdrm-common (2.4.83+git1709261752.7c7118~gd~a) ...
dpkg: error processing archive /var/cache/apt/archives/libdrm-common_2.4.83+git1709261752.7c7118~gd~a_all.deb (--unpack):
 trying to overwrite '/usr/share/libdrm/amdgpu.ids', which is also in package libdrm-amdgpu1:amd64 2.4.83+git1709261752.7c7118~gd~a
Errors were encountered while processing:
 /var/cache/apt/archives/libdrm-common_2.4.83+git1709261752.7c7118~gd~a_all.deb
E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)

*edit ppa purged with the help of apt --fix-broken install drm-common is re-installed on default ubuntu . I will check upgrading once mesa build is completed sucessfully.

[oibaf]

I reverted to the old libdrm package. For some reason mesa doesn't build with the updated libdrm.

[Ruediix]

OK, I updated to Zesty and am STILL getting some awful dependency hell trying to install this PPA.

I didn't have this issue in the past, it started a few months ago.

If you could walk me through finding the problem it would be helpful.