Vivek,

>From the wiki on ATI Radeon, in the troubleshooting section [1]:

-----------
This could be caused by having multiple versions of libGL.so on your
system. Run: 
   $ sudo updatedb
   $ locate libGL.so

This should return the following output: 
   $ locate libGL.so
   /usr/lib/libGL.so
   /usr/lib/libGL.so.1
   /usr/lib/libGL.so.1.2
   $

These are the only three libGL.so files you should have on your system.
If you have any more (eg. /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1.2), then remove
them. This should fix your problem.
-----------

Try removing the extra libGL.so files, and see if that helps.

- Cerebral

[1]
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ATI_Radeon_%26_Kernel_2.6#Direct_Rendering_Doesn.27t_Work



On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:18:53 -0400
"Vivek Ayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Here's the xorg.conf file. Sorry
> 
> On 7/13/06, Vivek Ayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I haven't been getting 3D acceleration with my 9700 pro for the past
> > few months now. I really didn't care b/c mesa was giving 2D
> > acceleration. Anyways, with kernel26beyond, I got the latest ati
> > beyond package and utils package and follow proper protocol in the
> > xorg.conf file, but when I check for 3D acceleration with
> > fglrxinfo, I get:
> >
> > display: :0.0  screen: 0
> > OpenGL vendor string: Mesa project: www.mesa3d.org
> > OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
> > OpenGL version string: 1.2 (1.5 Mesa 6.4.2)
> >
> > ...Also...when I run fgl_glxgears I get:
> >
> > Using GLX_SGIX_pbuffer
> > X Error of failed request:  BadLength (poly request too large or
> > internal Xlib length error)
> >   Major opcode of failed request:  16 (X_InternAtom)
> >   Serial number of failed request:  26
> >   Current serial number in output stream:  29
> >
> > I don't what error this is, but I'm pretty sure I followed the
> > archlinux wiki protocol. I'll attach my xorg.conf file and see if
> > you all see any errors. I don't I wasn't having these errors before
> >
> > One thing I did realize. Another thread mentioned something about a
> > bad libGL.so.1.2 file. Could that be the problem? I slocated my
> > system for this file and found two at the locations:
> >
> > /usr/lib/libGL.so.1.2 created July 2, 2006 (with latest update) &
> >
> > /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so.1.2 modified October 3, 2005.
> >
> > Is there a conflict here? Should I use the old one since it was
> > working before? Help appreaciated. Thanks.
> >
> > Vivek
> >

_______________________________________________
arch mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch

Reply via email to