Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-14 Thread Jim
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the
 2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is
 actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers
 with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?).

Last I heard they got the documentation for card initialization and (I
think) power management. No acceleration docs yet. It still came to
over 900 pages. Hopefully there's been more since.

 The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the
 most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git
 repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well.

ok, it looks like the radeon (no HD) driver is part of the
xf86-video-ati driver, and by the size of the ati_drv.so file, I'm
guessing most of what ati_drv.so does is access and control the access
of radeon_drv, correct?

I wonder why there's no cutoff for the 3D functionality in the ATi
driver's man page. It just lists all supported cards without mention
of which have 3D implementations (try `man radeon`).

-Jim Stapleton
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-14 Thread Roland Smith
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:03:38PM -0400, Jim wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the
  2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is
  actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers
  with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?).
 
 Last I heard they got the documentation for card initialization and (I
 think) power management. No acceleration docs yet. It still came to
 over 900 pages. Hopefully there's been more since.

Looking over the articles on the phoronix website it seems that
accelleration on the R300 is supported, R5xx is shaping up and R6xx has
just started but needs extra docs.

The DRM driver in FreeBSD also needs updating, which is in the works,
see other posts.

  The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the
  most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git
  repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well.
 
 ok, it looks like the radeon (no HD) driver is part of the
 xf86-video-ati driver, and by the size of the ati_drv.so file, I'm
 guessing most of what ati_drv.so does is access and control the access
 of radeon_drv, correct?

Not sure, but I guess so.
 
 I wonder why there's no cutoff for the 3D functionality in the ATi
 driver's man page. It just lists all supported cards without mention
 of which have 3D implementations (try `man radeon`).

It could be more clear. Maybe you can submit a bug report or a patch?

But further down it says:

   Option RenderAccel boolean
  Enables or disables hardware Render acceleration.   This  driver
  does  not  support  component alpha (subpixel) rendering.  It is
  only supported  on  Radeon  series  up  to  and  including  9200
  (9500/9700  and  newer  unsupported).   The default is to enable
  Render acceleration.

For the record, my Radeon HD 3450 (RV620)  works, but without accelleration at
the moment.

Roland
-- 
R.F.Smith   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)


pgpeagWiX6r5Q.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread John Nielsen
On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
 At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
 three things.

 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
 it's mostly a multimedia machine
 decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
 games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
 doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
 better).
 FreeBSD.

You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:

%grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386

 I've used Solaris and Linux, and honestly, I'd rather go back to
 Windows and use Cygwin for my *nix needs.
 I'd rather use FreeBSD for the system than Windows.

 64 Bit immediately knocks out the thoughts on using an nVidia card.

 Has anyone had much experience with a 3600 series ATi card, it's the
 best in the discreet-video category for my target price/performance,
 but not listed in the man pages for the Radeon (non-HD) - only the
 3400s and the 3800s). Aside from that, going for the really cheap end,
 has anyone had much experience with the Intel 4500HD chipsets yet? I'm
 lousy with other people's code (barely good with my own), but I could
 test if needed, if/when I get the board.

In my experience the Intel and Radeon drivers for Xorg work very well on 
FreeBSD, but I don't have experience with any of the specific hardware you 
mention.

 Could anyone give me some of their experiences here? How are your
 experiences with these pieces of hardware and their drivers in terms
 of stability/reliability (in FreeBSD of course)? Are either of these
 setups in a place where a tester would be needed/welcome?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Jim
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
 At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
 three things.

 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
 it's mostly a multimedia machine
 decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
 games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
 doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
 better).
 FreeBSD.

 You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:

 %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
 ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386


I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS
and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine.

Thanks,
-Jim Stapleton
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread John Nielsen
On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
  At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
  three things.
 
  64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
  it's mostly a multimedia machine
  decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
  games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
  doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
  better).
  FreeBSD.
 
  You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:
 
  %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
  ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386

 I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS
 and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine.

You may already know more than I do then; I haven't tried that and my main 
desktop is currently running i386.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Roland Smith
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 02:20:45PM -0400, Jim wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
  At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
  three things.
 
  64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
  it's mostly a multimedia machine
  decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
  games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
  doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
  better).
  FreeBSD.
 
  You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:
 
  %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
  ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386
 
 
 I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS
 and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine.

IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available
in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this
because it's easier just to install i386.

Roland
-- 
R.F.Smith   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)


pgpkQrLKbN4JI.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Steve Franks
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 02:20:45PM -0400, Jim wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote:
  At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want
  three things.
 
  64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well -
  it's mostly a multimedia machine
  decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few
  games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS
  doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be
  better).
  FreeBSD.
 
  You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only:
 
  %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile
  ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386
 

 I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS
 and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine.

 IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available
 in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this
 because it's easier just to install i386.

 Roland
 --
 R.F.Smith   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
 [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
 pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)


I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be
bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well?  I guess you'd wind
up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being
re-installed as 32bit, right?  I don't suppose there's any
infrastructure for simultaneously installing two versions of a port
(one of the reasons BSD doesn't crash as much as win32, no doubt, and
that we don't usually have .dll/.so hell)...still I might settle for a
32-bit X if I could have 64-bit disk  network still...

Steve
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Roland Smith
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:17:23PM -0400, Jim wrote:

 Has anyone had much experience with a 3600 series ATi card, it's the
 best in the discreet-video category for my target price/performance,
 but not listed in the man pages for the Radeon (non-HD) - only the
 3400s and the 3800s). Aside from that, going for the really cheap end,
 has anyone had much experience with the Intel 4500HD chipsets yet? I'm
 lousy with other people's code (barely good with my own), but I could
 test if needed, if/when I get the board.

The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the
2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is
actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers
with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?). The most
up-to-date info can usually be found on the phoronix.com website, e.g.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=NjU0OQ

The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the
most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git
repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well.

Roland
-- 
R.F.Smith   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)


pgphp9gmT0T6h.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Jim
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Steve Franks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be
 bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well?  I guess you'd wind
 up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being
 re-installed as 32bit, right?  I don't suppose there's any
 infrastructure for simultaneously installing two versions of a port
 (one of the reasons BSD doesn't crash as much as win32, no doubt, and
 that we don't usually have .dll/.so hell)...still I might settle for a
 32-bit X if I could have 64-bit disk  network still...

 Steve


Jail. I suspect I could build the base system plus X and copy
everything over to a jailed dir. Once there, I could set -m32 in the
CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS of the system make.conf. Build WINE in the jail,
add a /usr/local... bin32, lib32 and libexec32 to the main (non-jail)
part of the OS, and copy everything there. Then update the path and
libpath for my system... OK, not simple, but it'll be an interesting
experiment.

*Jeremy Clarkson* What could /possibly/ go wrong?

Not really had the issues you mentioned in Windows in the last few
years, but I still prefer FreeBSD - the KDE and Gnome user interfaces
(desktop management) are just much more efficient for getting work
done (for me anyway) than that of Windows, and I can have a lot more
control over my system.

-Jim Stapleton
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Josh Carroll
 Jail. I suspect I could build the base system plus X and copy
 everything over to a jailed dir. Once there, I could set -m32 in the
 CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS of the system make.conf. Build WINE in the jail,
 add a /usr/local... bin32, lib32 and libexec32 to the main (non-jail)
 part of the OS, and copy everything there. Then update the path and
 libpath for my system... OK, not simple, but it'll be an interesting
 experiment.

I tried this a while ago with a chroot. I installed 7.0-RELEASE/i386
there, and built ports inside the chroot. You need to also do a few
things to trick things like libtool (and other auto* tools) that your
arch is i386 and not amd64. From memory, I think you need to:

env UNAME_m=i386 make ...

For what it's worth, I got wine (and all depends) built, but it did
not work. It is likely I made a mistake along the way, of course. I
believe the resulting binary was generating a SIGABRT.

Naturally, if you have success doing this, it might be worth
publishing the (excruciating) details.

Regards,
Josh
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: ATi Intel graphics

2008-08-13 Thread Roland Smith
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:25:48PM -0700, Steve Franks wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available
  in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this
  because it's easier just to install i386.
 
  Roland
 
 
 I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be
 bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well? 

This has been discussed earlier on the list. To summarize (and correct
me if I'm wrong, people) It should be possible to modify the ports
infrastructure to support this, but nobody has volunteered to spend the
effort to make it so, because it's much easier to install the i386
version. 

Very few people actually _need_ to run amd64 (because they regularly run
out of address space on i386), especially on the desktop. 

 I guess you'd wind
 up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being
 re-installed as 32bit, right? 

Not completely. The X protocol works on 32 and 64 bit machines. But you
would need a 32-bit Xlib (talking to a 64-bit X server).

You can probably see that this would have significant consequences for
the ports infrastructure; having to record both 32- and 64-bit packages,
and the need to know which can work together.

 I don't suppose there's any infrastructure for simultaneously
 installing two versions of a port

Not at the moment, I think.

Roland
-- 
R.F.Smith   http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914  B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)


pgp5812AsthJy.pgp
Description: PGP signature