On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 18:11 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 29.11.2008 17:52, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-11-29 at 13:53 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 29.11.2008 00:16, Christopher A. Williams wrote:
>>>
<snip...>
> Wow... A simple "No, it's not working on F10 yet
because, among other
> things, the only known way to get it to work is to downgrade libdrm -
> which we think is a _really_ bad idea!" would have done just fine.
It wasn't meant as offense. If it came over as one: sorry.
No worries - I forgive you... :)
> I spent a few minutes digging on this. The hacks you mentioned
appear to
> date back to releases of the ATI drivers that are earlier than what is
> currently available from AMD.
Then you to the best of my knowledge digged into the wrong direction.
See:
http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=205030&page=2
Indeed...!
I followed this thread and found much more current information from many
of the same posters. So, if I read this correctly, the only known way to
work around what amounts to bad coding practice by ATI/AMD in their
proprietary drivers (Sheesh! I can't believe developers still like to
hard code directory paths when there's no reason to!!!) would be to use
bad packaging practice.
> Perhaps it would also help if this issue was actually
communicated
> someplace conspicuous on the RPMFusion site. Not everyone looking at
> RPMFusion will pick up a small paragraph at the end of a rather long
> post in fedora-announce.
>
> I'm looking at
RPMFusion.org right now, and there's absolutely nothing
> there about this. But there is something in the FAQ section about why
> people _should_ install the RPMFusion nVidia and ATI drivers, and that
> in turn provides a link to the "RPMFusionSwitcher" page, which gives
> complete instructions on how to (allegedly for ATI) do it.
>
> I think the RPMFusion team would save a lot of people (let alone
> themselves) a fair amount of pain and anguish if they:
> 1) Provided status on the site (takes less time than it took for you to
> write your message
>
> 2) Asked for help, including giving a technical explanation of the
> problem(s) with libdrm in F10 and fglrx - or whatever else is the issue.
>
> Maybe then, enough people would escalate things with AMD that they might
> actually do something to fix the problem, assuming the issue is with the
> proprietary driver. If I knew enough about complex packaging of drivers
> for X, I would gladly help. Unfortunately I'm an Enterprise
> Infrastructure Architect, and am not "hacker qualified" in the X.org
> driver development area.
Fully agreed. But that needs volunteers and people that actually do
that. most RPM Fusion contributors are already overloaded. Would you
want to help?
RPMFusion Wiki Account / Profile and Bugzilla account created
successfully. Glad to help where I am able. Let me know...
Cheers,
Chris
--
==================================
By all means marry;
If you get a good wife, you'll be happy.
If you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.
--Socrates