My approach is to maintain two types of systems. For applications that I want to keep 'stable", I put them on a headless server that uses robust hardware. For my X display, I use a couple client machines that I wipe and reinstall twice a year with the latest Fedora release.
Basically, I reinstalled client A with Fedora 6 when it was released, then reinstalled client B with Fedora 7 when that was released, then client A with Fedora 8, then client B with Fedora 9, etc. If I want newer hardware, I'll buy a new machine, to replace the aging client that's scheduled to be upgraded, a few days before the Fedora release. On Wed, July 9, 2008 5:16 pm, Coleman Kane said: > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 16:58 -0400, Labitt, Bruce wrote: >> Umm, thanks for your frank assessment. >> >> So which is the lesser of evils - using the AMD/ATI proprietary drivers >> for 3D, or totally rebuilding my system from the ground up? I presume >> that I will still have to mess around to get things going. I've fooled >> around with this a few days now, I don't like wasting my time - I have >> plenty to do. > > Have you tried their proprietary drivers on your current system yet? Do > they work on such an old server? > > You could always move to a Linux distro that has much newer components > to it, and start from there. The reason I posted "slackware" was just > that I've already done that route and felt it would actually be faster > to do than to shoehorn the development-class X server components into > your current system. It will be much cleaner. > > If you were to just go and download all the development code for the > X.org modules and start building them, you would start to run into > compiler problems where some of the X.org headers that you have in > your /usr/include/* need to actually be removed so that they don't > override package-local versions of those headers. I don't have a > verified list of which ones they were but there are a bunch of them. So, > by trial and error you would waste immense time trying to get these > packages built for your system. > > Starting from a fresh, empty base, you are more likely to have a full > working product much quicker. > >> >> If I were to do this from the ground up, which distro to choose? Why >> slackware? Why not Gentoo? I suppose I can have a daily overnight >> update and recompile everything for the morning. >> >> I had originally wanted a relatively stable system. It appears I can't >> get any work done with a stable system :( >> > > If you want to keep a stable system, you won't be able to easily do that > with cutting-edge hardware AND get all the cutting-edge features. This > is even beginning to be the case with Windows nowadays too (and they > have no excuse). > > From my experience, your options are: > - Cutting edge system > - Stable system > > Choose one. :-) > > In my case, I chose the first and use FreeBSD. The "cutting edge" is > "stable enough" for me, but I would never deploy a system like this onto > a bunch of office workstations. I would probably use hardware that is at > least a whole year old, and install FreeBSD 6.2 on them, after verifying > that all of the hardware has an existing track record of working well > under FreeBSD (either by buying a test system first, or researching it > online from someone else who's already bought the hardware). > >> Any other solutions available? Second opinion? Anyone? >> >> Bruce > > Maybe it would be worth your time to investigate using the most recent > development snapshot of the xf86-video-ati driver, from its git repo? It > *might* be more compatible with older X servers, as it is at least that > old. The build/install procedure is pretty similar to what you've > already done with the radeonhd driver from what I can tell. You'll just > want to change the "radeonhd" into "radeon" in your conf file after you > build and install the driver. > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Coleman Kane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 4:37 PM >> To: Labitt, Bruce >> Cc: Arc Riley; gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org >> Subject: RE: General Procedure to get ATI/DRI card running? >> >> On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 16:19 -0400, Labitt, Bruce wrote: >> > Arc led me to believe that I did not have to do that yet. He said >> that >> > the drm did not support radeonhd yet. >> > >> > Believe me, this is more complicated than I had anticipated... :) >> > >> > Here is the logfile >> > >> >> First of all, I can tell just by looking at this log output that you are >> in for a long headache. Your X server is over 2 years old, and won't be >> able to support DRI on the radeonhd. Your X server might not even >> support AIGLX on many of the drivers that will work with its older DRI >> implementation today. >> >> The latest X server is v1.4.1, and you are using v1.1.1. The oldest one >> that will support DRI using radeonhd is v1.4.99.something, from the v1.5 >> snapshots branch in the xorg-server git repository. >> >> Basically, you are trying to use a brand new driver for a brand new >> piece of hardware with an ancient installation of X-Windows. If your >> distro at least had a v1.4+ X-server, you might be able to get by just >> by rebuilding about five modules. >> >> Likely, you will need to rebuild almost all of X from scratch, and try >> to make sure that it doesn't accidentally bring in headers from the old >> X installation. >> >> IOW, to get it working on your system, you are in for a wild ride. It is >> probably easier to just install Slackware and start from scratch. >> >> Furthermore, if you do get all of the latest X stuff, you'll need to >> disable 2D acceleration in order to allow 3D acceleration to work on the >> latest driver IIRC. >> >> I strongly suggest you get in touch with the radeonhd mailing list as >> well. >> >> > X Window System Version 7.1.1 >> > Release Date: 12 May 2006 >> > X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 7.1.1 >> > Build Operating System: Linux 2.6.18-8.1.8.el5 x86_64 Red Hat, Inc. >> > Current Operating System: Linux xxx.xxxx.xxx 2.6.18-92.1.6.el5xen #1 >> SMP >> > Wed Jun 25 12:56:52 EDT 2008 x86_64 >> > Build Date: 12 June 2008 >> > Build ID: xorg-x11-server 1.1.1-48.41.el5_2.1 >> > Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org >> > to make sure that you have the latest version. >> > Module Loader present >> > Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, >> > (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, >> > (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. >> > (==) Log file: "/var/log/Xorg.0.log", Time: Wed Jul 9 15:02:06 2008 >> > -- > Coleman Kane > _______________________________________________ > gnhlug-discuss mailing list > gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org > http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/ > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix IM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99 -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/