The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

Mikko777 · 2009-02-01 15:16:46

leeyee wrote:

Wintervenom wrote:
Catalyst 9.1 is still causing a panic that locks the system after the X server is restarted, for me.
Back to 8.11 I go...
Yup, same experience. Stick with 8.11
By the way, how is composite manager with 8.11 working?

Goddamn black screen of death, most annoying ati bug ever!
Guess one could write a script to delete /etc/ati/amdpcdb on every logout to fix it

elmer_42 · 2009-02-01 15:20:43

Ranguvar wrote:

worst case, use a WM like Openbox that only offers a transparent rectangle.

What if I'm already using Openbox, though?

luciferin · 2009-02-01 16:29:16

This is so much better for me. MythTV runs great with compositing enabled, even with the OpenGL renderer which used to flicker like crazy. Xv isn't perfect yet, but it's getting there (the flicker is fixed, it just has ~1 inch offset for some reason). PAT being enabled no longer causes freezes, and finally page tearing has gotten much better on a composited screen. It's not perfect, but this release is so much more usable for me.

I don't restart X enough for it to be a problem to remove /etc/ati/amdpcsdb when I do.

cinan · 2009-02-01 17:24:50

Mikko777 wrote:

leeyee wrote:
Wintervenom wrote:
Catalyst 9.1 is still causing a panic that locks the system after the X server is restarted, for me.
Back to 8.11 I go...
Yup, same experience. Stick with 8.11
By the way, how is composite manager with 8.11 working?
Goddamn black screen of death, most annoying ati bug ever!
Guess one could write a script to delete /etc/ati/amdpcdb on every logout to fix it

look at http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Start_X_at_boot
just add "rm /etc/ati/amdpcdb" before startx

if [[ -z "$DISPLAY" ]] && [[ $(tty) = /dev/vc/1 ]]; then
  startx
  logout
fi

Wintervenom · 2009-02-01 22:23:35

leeyee wrote:

Wintervenom wrote:
Catalyst 9.1 is still causing a panic that locks the system after the X server is restarted, for me.
Back to 8.11 I go...
Yup, same experience. Stick with 8.11
By the way, how is composite manager with 8.11 working?

Works fine, besides the video-playing flicker.

Last edited by Wintervenom (2009-02-01 22:23:50)

aaaantoine · 2009-02-02 18:10:05

Mikko777 wrote:

AndyRTR wrote:
9-1 is broken on x86_64:
(EE) AIGLX error: dlopen of /usr/lib64/dri/fglrx_dri.so failed (/usr/lib64/dri/fglrx_dri.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory)
(EE) AIGLX: reverting to software rendering
the path is hardcoded in the precompiled libglx.so. this is all i found so far: http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?p=59685 - the recommended sed changes the path but makes the lib loading fail and a symlink is a NoGo!
I asked on the AMD list how to deal this. Maybe somebody has a suggestion here.
Well I just created the symlink while waiting for someone to post...
mkdir /usr/lib64/dri/
ln -s /usr/lib/dri/fglrx_dri.so .
Works!

How's this coming along? I see it was already packaged for the i686 folks.

AndyRTR · 2009-02-02 18:11:22

still no response from the AMD/Ati guys. but there was a weekend. so let's wait a bit longer.

leeyee · 2009-02-03 07:09:43

rm /etc/ati/amdpcsdb

cannot solve signal 4 X server error(which is a startx style synonymy of blank screen problem when using gdm), with catalyst 9.1 the problem remains. Downgrade back to 8.11

GERGE · 2009-02-03 12:04:47

This is better for me. There is improvement in Xv, no problems. I'm using Mobility X1300.

SyXbiT · 2009-02-09 16:40:38

i gave up with ATI.
I'm tired of always being promised that LATER, the drivers will be better than NVidia's

I sold my ATI 4870 and bought a GeForce GTX 260.
I want working compiz TODAY, and same day Xorg support.
we should all do a petition telling ATI they need to deliver NOW, and not keep promising later. Or at least get an official roadmap

True, ATI may deliver in 6 months, and I'll reconsider them then (though they'll have to EARN my business by delivering, not promising),
I'm just tired of excitedly installing each new catalyst to see little or no improvement.

My laptop with onboard intel gfx does compiz, but my $300 ATI doesn't?
you've got to be joking

Last edited by SyXbiT (2009-02-09 16:48:01)

zebeste · 2009-02-09 19:21:49

I've been having trouble getting my 4870 running too with archlinux, but I don't think its fair to fault ATI for it. They state in their release notes that they only officialy support versions of opensuse and redhat with their proprietary driver, and as far as I know it works for them. They never promised anything for archlinux, or the dozens of other distros of linux. And I don't expect them to either. It wouldn't be economcally feasible for them to make sure it ran on every version of linux under the sun.

cinan · 2009-02-09 19:53:50

zebeste wrote:

They never promised anything for archlinux, or the dozens of other distros of linux. And I don't expect them to either. It wouldn't be economcally feasible for them to make sure it ran on every version of linux under the sun.

why nvidia can and ati not??

zebeste · 2009-02-09 20:16:10

Honestly, I don't know know enough about the inner workings of either company, or their goals to give a complete answer , but with regards to economic feasability, one possible influence may be that nvidia has had consistenly higher market shares over ATI for the last couple years. market shares

Another thing is that ATI is putting effort towards supporting open source drivers for their. Nvidia, as far as I know, isn't.

Last edited by zebeste (2009-02-09 20:25:57)

Kilz · 2009-02-09 21:34:03

SyXbiT wrote:

i gave up with ATI.
I'm tired of always being promised that LATER, the drivers will be better than NVidia's
I sold my ATI 4870 and bought a GeForce GTX 260.
I want working compiz TODAY, and same day Xorg support.
we should all do a petition telling ATI they need to deliver NOW, and not keep promising later. Or at least get an official roadmap
True, ATI may deliver in 6 months, and I'll reconsider them then (though they'll have to EARN my business by delivering, not promising),
I'm just tired of excitedly installing each new catalyst to see little or no improvement.
My laptop with onboard intel gfx does compiz, but my $300 ATI doesn't?
you've got to be joking

I have compiz running on my 3870, not a problem. I turned it off, its distracting. Compiz itself is difficult, do you have acceleration outside of it?

I also understand a few things, perhaps others do also.
1. The code for the drivers is less than a year old. They have made fantastic improvement in a short time. But just like anything new in linux, its buggy.
2. The latest and greatest graphics cards almost always have driver issues.
3. Ranting on a forum does 0 bit of good. Filling out bug reports does. Sadly way to many feel they dont need to because someone else did it.
4. As zebeste said, they are putting effort towards a free driver. The specifications they released, even on their newest cards, is sure to make an impact. They deserve my support.

tim · 2009-02-09 22:28:37

zebeste wrote:

They state in their release notes that they only officialy support versions of opensuse and redhat with their proprietary driver, and as far as I know it works for them. They never promised anything for archlinux, or the dozens of other distros of linux. And I don't expect them to either. It wouldn't be economcally feasible for them to make sure it ran on every version of linux under the sun.

As far as I can understand, there should be little if any distro specific magic that ati need to do to get the drivers working because of xorg. A bit of documentation would allow the distros themselves to make sure that any variations like paths etc are set properly. As stated previously by cinan, nvidia manage to be non distro specific so the fact that ATI can't (or WONT) is pathetic. I don't believe it has anything to do with technicality. I'm sure that suse and ubuntu have some sort of financial connection or exclusive deal going on. Having said that, I was running suse as well as arch a year or so back and I can tell you that the ati drivers were just as crap on suse as anywhere else. In the end I got a new laptop with an nvidia card and everything worked.

I will NEVER buy anything with an ATI card again. NEVER EVER EVER. ATI have absolutely no time for the linux community, I have absolutely no money for ATI.

</rant>

SyXbiT · 2009-02-09 23:39:34

i have filed bug reports, but they keep a closed mailing list, and I've had no replies from emails.

like i said, i may switch back to ATI, but only when they are better than Nvidia.
I will not switch because of a promise, or a 'soon'

we could be waiting till catalyst 9.3, we could be waiting till catalyst 11.12

Kilz · 2009-02-10 12:40:34

tim wrote:

zebeste wrote:
They state in their release notes that they only officialy support versions of opensuse and redhat with their proprietary driver, and as far as I know it works for them. They never promised anything for archlinux, or the dozens of other distros of linux. And I don't expect them to either. It wouldn't be economcally feasible for them to make sure it ran on every version of linux under the sun.
As far as I can understand, there should be little if any distro specific magic that ati need to do to get the drivers working because of xorg. A bit of documentation would allow the distros themselves to make sure that any variations like paths etc are set properly. As stated previously by cinan, nvidia manage to be non distro specific so the fact that ATI can't (or WONT) is pathetic. I don't believe it has anything to do with technicality. I'm sure that suse and ubuntu have some sort of financial connection or exclusive deal going on. Having said that, I was running suse as well as arch a year or so back and I can tell you that the ati drivers were just as crap on suse as anywhere else. In the end I got a new laptop with an nvidia card and everything worked.
I will NEVER buy anything with an ATI card again. NEVER EVER EVER. ATI have absolutely no time for the linux community, I have absolutely no money for ATI.
</rant>

Did you learn your hate of ATI before or after they were bought by AMD?

tim · 2009-02-10 15:28:32

Kilz wrote:

Did you learn your hate of ATI before or after they were bought by AMD?

Before.

I liked AMD, I always cheered for them over intel. When they bought ATI I thought that they might set them straight. How wrong was I :-(

kensai · 2009-02-10 16:23:15

I will give the 9.1 a try on x86_64 again, this time I will go the symlink route. Since, I had no problems with 9.1 in i686. I mean, 9.1 has been the only driver to not lock me at kdm login screen at certain times, in certain strange situations.

zebeste · 2009-02-10 17:55:17

kensai wrote:

I will give the 9.1 a try on x86_64 again, this time I will go the symlink route. Since, I had no problems with 9.1 in i686. I mean, 9.1 has been the only driver to not lock me at kdm login screen at certain times, in certain strange situations.

If you get it working please let us know how. I'm going to try some different things tonight myself to try and get it working.

AndyRTR · 2009-02-10 18:10:12

Just to let you all know: I got a small response after the 2nd reminder on the AMD/Ati list:

I am actively trying to get the right development team lined up.

Regards,

Matthew

On 7-Feb-09, at 12:03 PM, Andreas Radke <a.radke@arcor.de> wrote:

> No hint? Any other place where we can get support?
>
> -Andy

kensai · 2009-02-10 18:11:04

mkdir /usr/lib64/dri/
ln -s /usr/lib/dri/fglrx_dri.so .

I am just going to do that, the thing that seems to fix it for some.

Why did I had to buy a laptop with ATI? Such a bad decision.

Wintervenom · 2009-02-10 23:58:17

kensai wrote:

mkdir /usr/lib64/dri/
ln -s /usr/lib/dri/fglrx_dri.so .
I am just going to do that, the thing that seems to fix it for some.
Why did I had to buy a laptop with ATI? Such a bad decision.

I did the same thing. I know how you feel.

kensai · 2009-02-11 03:01:28

Well, everything went fine here, after doing the symlink. So I should say, this is safe to do. The only thing that annoys me now is everytime I launch an appliacation from terminal I get this:

Xlib:  extension "Generic Event Extension" missing on display ":0.0".

Printed out 7 times. I have read it does no harm, but anyways is annoying to know it is there.

zebeste · 2009-02-11 14:35:37

Would you mind posting your xorg.conf file? Also, I'm assuming you added fglrx to the modules in rc.conf, correct? When I go home tonight I would like to have as much information as possible when attempting this (again). Thanks.

Last edited by zebeste (2009-02-11 14:43:23)

Arch Linux

#126 2009-02-01 15:16:46

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#127 2009-02-01 15:20:43

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#128 2009-02-01 16:29:16

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#129 2009-02-01 17:24:50

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#130 2009-02-01 22:23:35

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#131 2009-02-02 18:10:05

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#132 2009-02-02 18:11:22

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#133 2009-02-03 07:09:43

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#134 2009-02-03 12:04:47

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#135 2009-02-09 16:40:38

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#136 2009-02-09 19:21:49

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#137 2009-02-09 19:53:50

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#138 2009-02-09 20:16:10

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#139 2009-02-09 21:34:03

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#140 2009-02-09 22:28:37

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#141 2009-02-09 23:39:34

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#142 2009-02-10 12:40:34

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#143 2009-02-10 15:28:32

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#144 2009-02-10 16:23:15

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#145 2009-02-10 17:55:17

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#146 2009-02-10 18:10:12

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#147 2009-02-10 18:11:04

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#148 2009-02-10 23:58:17

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#149 2009-02-11 03:01:28

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

#150 2009-02-11 14:35:37

Re: The AMD/ATI Bar & Grill

Board footer