Ken Moffat wrote: > On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 02:21:25AM -0500, Joe Ciccone wrote: > >> Ken Moffat wrote: >> >>> 5. For the ati drivers, 6.7.196 is definitely good IMHO (haven't tried >>> .197 in a known good environment yet). Supposedly, 6.7 is needed >>> for randr-1.2, but the latest 6.6 seemed ok to me on one machine >>> when 6.7.195 was both the latest release and broken. >>> >>> >> I've had so much trouble with the ati drivers that I just bought a >> nvidia card. Whos drivers seem to be working fine, playing games through >> wine at 1600x1200. >> > I regrettably have to agree that the 6.7 series of ati drivers are > a PITA and definitely not stable everywhere. 6.7.197 caused 'startx' > to lock the box on the same machine where 6.7.195 couldn't find any > screens. The compiler on that (clfs) build had certain issues with > its testsuite, so I suspected a miscompilation somewhere, but tonight > I've proved that 6.7.196 is fine there. For future builds with 7.3 > on radeons, I think I'll go back to 6.6 drivers. > > What this really highlights is the lack of consistent information > about which series of versions to use in xorg-7.3 : maybe the info > that randr-1.2 'needs' 6.7 was wrong, or maybe 6.6 doesn't take > advantage of new features but otherwise works ok. > > ĸen > I'm definately not liking the ati drivers now either....
(WW) AIGLX: 3D driver claims not to support visual [insert every 0x?? here except 0x4b] Guess y'all seeing the same errors? but 196 is working? I'm confused. Think I'll try a few different ones. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
