The Friday 24 October 2008 04:09:07 Amit Uttamchandani, you wrote : > > Yeah I did upgrade the xorg and mesa to be able to install radeonhd. Here > > are the package that have been upgraded : > > > > [MIS A JOUR] libgl1-mesa-dri 7.0.3-6 -> 7.2-1 > > [MIS A JOUR] libgl1-mesa-glx 7.0.3-6 -> 7.2-1 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg 1:7.3+18 -> 1:7.4~4 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-core 2:1.4.2-7 -> 2:1.5.2-1 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-input-evdev 1:2.0.3-1 -> 1:2.0.3-2 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-input-kbd 1:1.3.1-1 -> 1:1.3.1-2 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-input-mouse 1:1.3.0-1 -> 1:1.3.0-2 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-input-synaptics 0.14.7~git20070706-3 -> > > 0.15.0+git20080820-1 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-video-mach64 6.8.0-1 -> 6.8.0-3 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-video-r128 6.8.0-1 -> 6.8.0-2 > > [MIS A JOUR] xserver-xorg-video-radeon 1:6.9.0-1+lenny4 -> > > 1:6.9.0+git20081012.c0e6cb6d-1 > > This is basically the same set of packages that got upgraded for me. > You said you compiled 1.2.2? There is 1.2.3 out for radeonhd? Could you > try installing that from experimental and see how that goes?
Nop I compiled 1.2.3 sorry because it's not in experimental for amd64 yet. I'll try to use the package from experimental as soon as he is compiled for amd64, it shouldn't take more than a week I think. The strange thing is when downgrading to 1.2.1-3 (the version I can get from experimental) I still have direct rendering ok according to glxinfo althought the debian changelog didn't mention backporting the patch for DRI in their 1.2.1-3 versions. Software which ask DRI accept launching indeed but they are as slow as if it was software rendering. What could make the X server claim there is DRI althought it is software rendering ? Regards, Thomas Preud'homme -- Why debian : http://www.debian.org/intro/why_debian
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
