Re: Sid, xorg and fglrx
Joe Hart wrote:
> Tim Wood wrote:
>> I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
>
>> My video is ATI Radeon X1600, which requires the proprietary fglrx
>> driver. This has been running well on my HP NX8420 giving me the full
>> 1680*1050 resolution. The problem now as reported in Xorg.0.log:
>
>> (II) Module fglrx: vendor="FireGL - ATI Technologies Inc."
>> compiled for 7.1.0, module version = 8.28.8
>> Module class: X.Org Video Driver
>> ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 1.0
>> [R200Setup] X version mismatch - detected X.org 1.3.0.0, required X.org
>> 7.1.0.0
>
>> I upgraded from a 2.6.18 kernel to 2.6.20 but module-assistant can't
>> even compile the module. It compiles OK on 2.6.18, but trying to load it
>> gives the error above. I was interested to note that Xorg.0.log reports
>> the version as 1.3.0.0, matching the error above.
[...]
>
> Blame ATI. Their driver do not work with the newer kernel, and a rumor
> has it that M$ is behind the deal because ATI is the supplier for the
> video in the xbox 360. The only solution until ATI gets off their butts
> and fixes their drivers is for you to use the free drivers.
>
> There are 2. radeon and ati. Neither are as good as the older fglrx,
> but the radeon version can at least handle GL.
>
The newest fglrx-driver from ATI 8.36.5 supports kernel 2.6.20.x. But
for the other problem, the detection of X.org 1.3.0.0, I'm not sure.
For the case of the closed source driver, may I call your attention to
the ATI/AMD Radeon XPRESS 200M Linux Driver Petition at
http://www.petitiononline.com/x200MLin/petition.html
?
Maybe this is the way to reach hardware vendors if they don't ask their
customers by them self like Dell did.
--
Regards,
Jörg-Volker.
Reply to: