Ryan Gordon Criticizes Open-Source Drivers Again

[Luke_Wolf]

Of course it's not a new idea. I wouldn't suggest it is. I was mainly just trying to say that I believe that is the only path toward a solution. The only reason linux can't/hasn't/won't get it right is because people refuse to compromise even if it would make a better experience for everyone but them (speaking of distros, and project managers). Like I said in the first post though, I see no reason why a distro couldn't include newer libs in addition to what the base they targeted already provided. All that's needed is SOMETHING common to target when writing software. Just so devs can say "OK, it looks like 75% of linux desktop users use LDF version x or newer" and just target the oldest one they wish. Newer ones should mostly work without problems if they try to keep API compatible going forward (which I think is very important as well).

Why do we need to compromise? The entire point of linux is so that you can change the environment to fit your needs rather than having to change to fit the environments needs. This isn't BSD and we're all better off for it, yes proprietary third party software may have trouble dealing with it if they don't handle it properly, but that's why you make it clear what you depend on and let the packagers do their thing.

The software is eventually going to break anyway unless the company opensources it. In fact the best thing they can do for us is either use an open source engine or make the engine they're using open source, and set it up like Id does where it's .wad based or whatever they want to do.

This is the only real solution to the problem, besides continuing to just let the packagers handle it, anything else results in a mess of dependencies or turning Linux into BSD (which is an extremely bad idea)

[Ancurio]

Again, this is essentially what distributions do when presented with such an archive. Only they will actually check that it actually works.

And packaging software is a wonderful concept that mostly works. except for the case that the software isn't open source.
I don't think having to rely on 'loose' communities that aren't bound by law or contracts is a viable solution for commercial 3rd parties.
The reasons (delays etc.) have already been named I think

[dumbo]

How about 'Linux game base 2011.1'?

- requires a working opengl installation.
- requires version 6.0.M of library X with options A, B, C.
- requires version 3.0.N of library Y with options D, E, F.

linux-game-base-2011.1.43.x86.mydist,rpm:
-> requires those specific libraries are installed.
-> maintained by mydist.
-> provides /usr/bin/game-profile/2011.1 which will setup an environment for an application using those specific libraries, and sets environment variables explaining the audio system in use.

A separate application 'Linux game base 2011.1.tester.sh':
- runs a simple script using the above profile which checks compability with the 2011.1 spec "requirements".

Individual applications just install themselves assuming that the libraries are correct, and runs the profile script before the executable.

In theory that could be less work for everyone? Although you'd end up with lots of copies of libraries unless something clever is done.

[del_diablo]

But in general, I don't think you're right anyway. This can be the case with some poorly-done third party packages, sure.

This was my point: 3rd party packages are a lot more common than one thinks. And nobody is forcing the 3d parties to actually follow the standards.
They WILL strap their packages to a spesific distro, forcing it to only look for 1 spesific version.
And how do we deal with this?
Either you add a "ignore it, just silly 3rd party bootstrapping"-button to our package managers, or we must find a way to force all 3rd parties to follow packaging rules.
It is like distribution a tarball, except that they did not include enough libaries.

[Ansla]

Nobody ever wondered why games need to bundle binaries in the first place?

I see games in the same category as movies: CONTENT. If I were to buy a disk with a movie and it wouldn't play on linux because it was a Windows executable I woulnd't ask the producer when the Linux version will be ready, I would ask them why it's not a mpg, avi, mkv or whatever other format that I already have a player for.
The same for a game, what I'm interested in a game is the graphicks, sound, maybe some music and the scripts that are required to allow interaction. Not the engine and the hacks they added to the engine so that they get a few extra FPS. When the gaming industry will be out of it's infancy they will be able to separate the engine from content and when you will buy a game you will only get the content, the engine required to play it will be packaged by your distribution.
And until they reach that point I will prefer to install those binary blobs full of hacks under wine than pretend they are native applications. They may be in the ELF format, but they are still follow the Windos model of distributing software that I don't even want to work on Linux, Linux already has a much better model and it shouldn't be broken just because "that's how we do it on Windows and we're used to it".

P.S. Yeah, I'm one of those "zealots" some of you were talking earlier.

[benmoran]

I don't know all the details, but it seems like the Steel Storm guys are on the right track.

[ean5533]

i have no world to explain how sick i'm from this "IT JUST WORKS"?? idiocity. if it "just worked" i would not be making my living from going in people's homes and offices to fix that shit. including instances of "this game just doesn't work anymore!!1" and "it wouldn't install/my system gone down after installation".

So let me get this straight: you acknowledge that your job is to go around fixing one-off problems that people are having, and yet you think your experience should be treated as the norm? Do you really not see a failure in logic there?

Since we're playing the anecdotal evidence game, let me give you mine: On Windows XP I have never, ever had to do anything more than insert an install disc to install a game. Nothing. Ever. Without exception. And being a big gamer, I've probably purchased and installed roughly 30-40 games on Windows XP over the course of my life.

But my personal experience means nothing in the broad scheme of things. The fact that I happened to have a great experience doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong, just like your bad experience doesn't mean you're right. What I can tell you is that if you talk to cross-platform vendors, you will almost invariably find that making a closed-source game work seamlessly on Windows is easier than making it work seamlessly on Linux, for the very reasons that Ryan Gordon talked about.

Holy Fucks and Marbles! at least have a decency not to spew such bullcrap around here, will you ?

...

PS: while foreseeing some additional moral preaching about civility i'll add: no, i don't give a damn, get off from your high horse or take it like it is from there.

Thank you for reminding me why I avoid posting on this site. Every time I do, the conversation comes grinding to a halt when someone like you comes in screaming how everyone in the thread is "spewing bullcrap" and then provides their single point of data to prove how everyone is wrong. You're even nice enough to end your post with an addendum about how civility is a waste of time. Quite amusing.

So fine, let's play it your way. You're an arrogant, angst-filled prick, and you make the world a lesser place.

Ok, your turn! Call me an idiotic faggot or something, this game is fun!

[Sidicas]

I was having problems getting a few of the games in the Humble Indie Bundle #3 working on my laptop running an ATI Mobility X700.

AMD does not support my graphics chip on any platform.

Under Windows, they pass the buck on to the manuf. of the laptop (HP) to provide the drivers....

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/737-28041SupportforATIMobility.aspx

Unfortunately HP only released one version of the driver (dated 2007) and it's got some known bugs in some games under Windows, and HP has no plans of ever releasing an updated graphics driver for this (now discontinued) laptop.

Under Linux, right now I'm running the Mesa "radeon" driver, which only supports OpenGL 1.4, even though this hardware can run OpenGL 2.0 games under Windows. I've heard that the Gallium3D drivers now supports OpenGL 2.0 on this hardware, so I'm really looking forward to trying it out. For now, a couple of the Linux games that I got aren't rendering properly using the "radeon" driver, but they do render properly using the software Mesa driver. I've got my fingers crossed and am hoping that when I update my OS, Gallium3D will fix everything for me..

It would have been nice to have a Catalyst / closed source driver provided by AMD under either Windows or Linux, but it never happened.. I've seen the benchmarks of the Catalyst driver and it makes me drool...

It appears I will have no choice but to continue using open source drivers for the life of the laptop. So I have to give a shout out to all the great people who are still working on improving drivers for this hardware (YAY!! r300g team!!!).. Just letting you know that your work is greatly appreciated as both AMD and HP don't care at all about releasing decent drivers for my hardware under any platform..

[allquixotic]

I was having problems getting a few of the games in the Humble Indie Bundle #3 working on my laptop running an ATI Mobility X700.

AMD does not support my graphics chip on any platform.

Under Windows, they pass the buck on to the manuf. of the laptop (HP) to provide the drivers....

http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/737-28041SupportforATIMobility.aspx

Unfortunately HP only released one version of the driver (dated 2007) and it's got some known bugs in some games under Windows, and HP has no plans of ever releasing an updated graphics driver for this (now discontinued) laptop.

Under Linux, right now I'm running the Mesa "radeon" driver, which only supports OpenGL 1.4, even though this hardware can run OpenGL 2.0 games under Windows. I've heard that the Gallium3D drivers now supports OpenGL 2.0 on this hardware, so I'm really looking forward to trying it out. For now, a couple of the Linux games that I got aren't rendering properly using the "radeon" driver, but they do render properly using the software Mesa driver. I've got my fingers crossed and am hoping that when I update my OS, Gallium3D will fix everything for me..

It would have been nice to have a Catalyst / closed source driver provided by AMD under either Windows or Linux, but it never happened.. I've seen the benchmarks of the Catalyst driver and it makes me drool...

It appears I will have no choice but to continue using open source drivers for the life of the laptop. So I have to give a shout out to all the great people who are still working on improving drivers for this hardware (YAY!! r300g team!!!).. Just letting you know that your work is greatly appreciated as both AMD and HP don't care at all about releasing decent drivers for my hardware under any platform..

Wow, that's some ancient hardware. In this case I actually agree with HP and AMD that you should just move on and upgrade your system. But still, you are right down in the prime target market for r300g, but you sound like you're (still?) running r300c classic driver? Why are you doing that? Marek Olsak has been working on r300g for over a year now, and it's fantastically polished and in many benchmarks is faster than r600g on a HD5970. So what are you waiting for?!?

Oh, let me guess. You're one of those ultra-conservative types who only uses the previous version of Debian Stable or RHEL? Because I can't think of what current distro you might be running that doesn't ship r300g by default.

Ironic that Marek has been doing all that work for you and like a dozen other people who still run r300-class hardware, yet you're the same type of user who also lets their software rot away with years of obsolescence.

If you're feeling intimidated by new software, just install the latest stable Ubuntu. It's got a good compromise of recentness and stability, and it does ship r300g (albeit a significantly older version than you could find in Git if you compile from source).

Sorry if you actually do run a recent distro, but from your post you made it sound like you are running r300c still on some ancient distro and are either afraid or unable to upgrade. That's just pure irony considering that a volunteer spends lots of his time making your driver better for your obsolete hardware and you can't even be arsed to take advantage of it.

[Sidicas]

Oh, let me guess. You're one of those ultra-conservative types who only uses the previous version of Debian Stable or RHEL? Because I can't think of what current distro you might be running that doesn't ship r300g by default.

It's two things..

The first, I keep hearing that the Gallium3D driver isn't as fast as the Mesa classic driver in all situations.. I haven't really seen any benchmarks comparing them since June of last year.. Is it faster now? I just got Phoronix Test Suite this morning and am going to be running some benchmarks on r300c to compare to everybody else's benchmarks running r300g... I haven't heard anything at all.. All I know is that it supports more features than r300c..

The second, is that I don't want to move from KDE3 to KDE 4 until KDE 4.7 (or newer) gets into Debian Testing.. There's a lot of things in KDE3 that are still missing in KDE4 such as the ability to mix your desktop background on-the-fly which I like to have on my travel laptop because it shows which areas of the world are currently in sunlight (updated every 10 mins).. It really helps when it comes to dealing with the jet-lag.

KDE4 has Globe, but it's a separate application. It calculates sunlight like kworldclock used to, but it renders it to the display instead of saving it to an image and even if it did save it to an image, I'd have to figure out how to automate it.. kworldclock got turned into a cute little widget, and now it won't export sunlight map images for Desktop wallpapers (as far as I know).

There are a few other things in KDE4 that aren't quite as polished as they were in KDE3 yet, but they're getting there.. I do plan to upgrade that laptop to Debian testing once KDE 4.7 gets there. Even if I do make the jump to KDE4, I'd probably run it without all the KWIN effects because it's old hardware.

It's not that I want to run old software, it's that some of the newer software loses features, so I just don't run it.. If I could figure out how to get my system configured the way it is now on KDE4 or even Gnome, I would. I've got KDE4 and Debian Testing running in a Virtual Machine and am trying to find other ways to get it configured the way I want.

If I could figure out how to run the Gallium3D driver with KDE3 (on Debian oldstable) without too much effort in recompiling, I'm fine with that also..

And I do run Ubuntu 11.04 and other newer distros,, it's just on different (newer) hardware, but those PCs have different purposes / uses