On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 03:47:43PM +0200, Joe Hart wrote:
> Even if the discharge of a firearm is illegal, doesn't mean that making
> one is. The hack that you posted is not dangerous, imo. As you point
> out, it is just a random string of numbers. However, applying this
> random string of numbe
BTW: Why is the latest fglrx driver only available for i386? AMD64 is
just at 8.31.xx
http://packages.debian.org/fglrx-driver
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 08 May 2007, Tim Wood wrote:
> On 07 May 2007, Anthony Campbell wrote:
> >On 07 May 2007, Tim Wood wrote:
> >
> >>> My thanks for all the comments.
> >>>
> >>> I tried the latest ATI driver 8.36.5 but the included check.sh shows
> >>the > Xserver as 1.3.0 and there is no target for that.
> >
On 07 May 2007, Anthony Campbell wrote:
On 07 May 2007, Tim Wood wrote:
> My thanks for all the comments.
>
> I tried the latest ATI driver 8.36.5 but the included check.sh shows the
> Xserver as 1.3.0 and there is no target for that.
>
> In regard to the HP Nx 8420 itself, it is 3 months
On 07 May 2007, Tim Wood wrote:
> My thanks for all the comments.
>
> I tried the latest ATI driver 8.36.5 but the included check.sh shows the
> Xserver as 1.3.0 and there is no target for that.
>
> In regard to the HP Nx 8420 itself, it is 3 months old, ACPI works on
> both the 2.6.18 and 2.6.
My thanks for all the comments.
I tried the latest ATI driver 8.36.5 but the included check.sh shows the
Xserver as 1.3.0 and there is no target for that.
In regard to the HP Nx 8420 itself, it is 3 months old, ACPI works on
both the 2.6.18 and 2.6.20 kernels in the 686 and AMD64 versions.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linas Žvirblis wrote:
> Joe Hart wrote:
>
>> After a bit of investigation, I just want to point out that the hacks
>> that you provided are illegal. They directly violate the ATI license
>> agreement that one agrees to when installing the proprietary
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Joe Hart wrote:
> After a bit of investigation, I just want to point out that the hacks
> that you provided are illegal. They directly violate the ATI license
> agreement that one agrees to when installing the proprietary drivers in
> the first place
Linas ½virblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To make it work _without_ the hack? No, it will not help. The check
> is performed by fglrx_drv.so, which is not built, but distributed in
> binary form, and it has the check hardcoded.
Ok. Thanks for the info.
--
Dominique Dumont
"Delivering succes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Linas Žvirblis wrote:
> Dominique Dumont wrote:
>
>>> From my experience fglrx works with kernel 2.6.20 (amd64).
>
> I would recommend using 2.6.21 on new HP laptops. Not
> sure about this particular one, but on some models ACPI is totally
> broken w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dominique Dumont wrote:
> If it's a dumb check, I guess I should try also to re-build the fglrx
> driver *once* xserver-xorg-core 1.3.0 is installed.
To make it work _without_ the hack? No, it will not help. The check is
performed by fglrx_drv.so, wh
Linas ½virblis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But, it cannot use xserver-xorg-core 1.3.0. So you will have to hold
>> xserver-xorg-core to 1.1.1-21 until (at least) the next release.
>
> It can use 1.3.0 just fine, it just refuses to do so because of a dumb
> version check performed by the driver.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim Wood wrote:
>>
> Tim Wood wrote:
>
> I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
> > My video is ATI Radeon X1600, which requires the proprietary fglrx
> driver. This has been running well on my HP NX8420 gi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dominique Dumont wrote:
>> From my experience fglrx works with kernel 2.6.20 (amd64).
I would recommend using 2.6.21 on new HP laptops. Not
sure about this particular one, but on some models ACPI is totally
broken with anything before 2.6.21-rc5. And
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim Wood wrote:
> I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
>
> My video is ATI Radeon X1600, which requires the proprietary fglrx
> driver. This has been running well on my HP NX8420 giving me the full
> 1680*1050 res
On 5/7/07, Tim Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
There is lots of information in the BTS:
http://bugs.debian.org/fglrx-driver
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EM
Jörg-Volker Peetz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The newest fglrx-driver from ATI 8.36.5 supports kernel 2.6.20.x. But
> for the other problem, the detection of X.org 1.3.0.0, I'm not sure.
>From my experience fglrx works with kernel 2.6.20 (amd64).
But, it cannot use xserver-xorg-core 1.3.0. So
Joe Hart wrote:
> Tim Wood wrote:
>> I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
>
>> My video is ATI Radeon X1600, which requires the proprietary fglrx
>> driver. This has been running well on my HP NX8420 giving me the full
>> 1680*1050 resolution. The problem now as repo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tim Wood wrote:
> I'm another who has problems with the latest upgrade in sid's xorg.
>
> My video is ATI Radeon X1600, which requires the proprietary fglrx
> driver. This has been running well on my HP NX8420 giving me the full
> 1680*1050 resolution
19 matches
Mail list logo
