Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

scottishduck · 2009-02-06 12:04:39

I can't help but notice that 9.1 for 32-bit has entered extra, while the 64-bit version isn't even in testing. Is this a simple error or has someone forgot to update the package?

Cerebral · 2009-02-06 12:22:55

It's neither - there have been issues building the 64-bit package.

ckristi · 2009-02-06 12:31:29

OMG, if it's AMD's fault I swear I won't buy their hardware anymore, unless embedded in some odd devices, regardless of their openness.

tomk · 2009-02-06 14:21:26

Note from AndyRTR, the maintainer, on the arch-dev-public ML: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch … 10173.html

ckristi · 2009-02-06 23:22:42

I think catalyst should stay in extra... at least until a working opensource driver will be able to serve at least compositing.

pjjanak · 2009-02-06 23:56:42

It's not the hugest of issues...it's not even a big one. I'm pretty sure people have just had to move on file from one location to another. Just a simple patch. Don't go pointing fingers!

Peter

wonder · 2009-02-06 23:57:50

pijanak read again.

Is there any workaround other than creating an unwanted symlink or the weird
sed on libglx.so (see http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?p=59685)
that I expect to be a license breaker.

Last edited by wonder (2009-02-06 23:58:21)

Wintervenom · 2009-02-07 00:23:29

I think it should be downgraded to 8.11 -- at least that one works half-way decently.

Last edited by Wintervenom (2009-02-07 00:24:17)

ckristi · 2009-02-07 07:09:12

@pjjanak: If everybody will stop pointing fingers, what's the point of democracy? If we don't start being more selective about good hardware vendors (AMD is one) with bad software skills and habits, then they'll never learn. And _you_ will still use buggy software. Fortunately, they've realised that opening up the specs will be more of a problem solver than a problem generator. And that was just because many voices have risen to point out their driver just got buggier over time. It's our right to point fingers and I encourage everyone who has something to say to just say it!

Last edited by ckristi (2009-02-07 07:09:31)

R00KIE · 2009-02-08 02:08:15

ckristi wrote:

@pjjanak: If everybody will stop pointing fingers, what's the point of democracy? If we don't start being more selective about good hardware vendors (AMD is one) with bad software skills and habits, then they'll never learn. And _you_ will still use buggy software. Fortunately, they've realised that opening up the specs will be more of a problem solver than a problem generator. And that was just because many voices have risen to point out their driver just got buggier over time. It's our right to point fingers and I encourage everyone who has something to say to just say it!

Amen
Buggy? Yes absolutely, I have a mobility radeon on my notebook but it doesn't support powerplay with the amd binary driver (which identifies the card as a mobility radeon by the way ... either it is a mobility radeon and it supports powerplay or it isn't and they allow me to play with the clock speeds .... which I can't right now too >_>). I have left a message on amd's bud tracker but I think it will not do much good.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-02-06 12:04:39

Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#2 2009-02-06 12:22:55

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#3 2009-02-06 12:31:29

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#4 2009-02-06 14:21:26

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#5 2009-02-06 23:22:42

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#6 2009-02-06 23:56:42

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#7 2009-02-06 23:57:50

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#8 2009-02-07 00:23:29

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#9 2009-02-07 07:09:12

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

#10 2009-02-08 02:08:15

Re: Catalyst 9.1 x64 nowhere to be seen

Board footer