Dave Lentz, thank you for your comments. Regarding https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fglrx-installer/+bug/1069299/comments/3 : >"Thank you for your bug report. To maintain a respectful atmosphere, please >follow the code of conduct - http://www.ubuntu.com/community/conduct/ . Bug >reports are handled by humans, the majority of whom are volunteers, so please >bear this in mind."
My posts are in line with the Code of Conduct. Regarding https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fglrx-installer/+bug/1069299/comments/5 : >"Quick note: bug 1068661 is for a RadeonHD 6000-series card and isn't the same >as this one." As I said, potential duplicates. >"Yeah, I see those other bug reports where you keep claiming that any source that's not the AMD website is "conjecture." The AMD site is not infallible and is not intelligent enough to prevent you from installing an incompatible driver (just like Synaptic or software-center). As an experiment for you: put a Radeon X1600 in your system, and go to the AMD website. Good luck trying to install the ancient Catalyst 9-3 driver on anything later thean Hardy/8.04 (even though you meet the minimum requirements)..." As we both know, this bug report is not seeking a fix for the upstream release but the one in the Ubuntu repository. As well, this is an fglrx regression because it worked in Lucid for this hardware. >"To take your logic further, you could file a bug against the nvidia package when you download the nvidia driver on your system and it doesn't work (even if you don't have an nvidia card). Anyway...." I've never presented such logic and asking for such an experiment is ridiculous. >"Ubuntu does not support installing drivers from the AMD website..." We both knew this already. >"so your mention of Catalyst 12-6 is moot, unless you want to make a wishlist bug asking Canonical to offer the 12-6 Legacy driver." I, and the rest of the Ubuntu Community, are only looking for the "It just works." experience one comes to expect when using Ubuntu software from the repositories. If this report is deemed a Wishlist by the maintainers of fglrx https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-devel-discuss-lists , for whatever reason(s), then so be it. At least the regression is being dealt with. >"That would be helpful to a lot of users, and I hope it happens, but I wouldn't hold my breath" Fair enough! :D >"based on how AMD handled this last time (Catalyst 9-3)." Could you please expand on this point? >"Conclusion: this "bug" is Invalid because the user installed the wrong driver on his/her system (just like if an intel user installed the nvidia driver)" This conclusion is flawed. When I install fglrx in Quantal, just as I in Lucid, it should still work, in whatever implementation would be supported/required. It doesn't. "If you wish, please file a new bug requesting a new package (fglrx- legacy-installer or something like that)." Please stop wasting my time asking me to file additional, frivolous reports. As well, please stop Status jockeying this report. It's valid, unless the maintainers say otherwise. Thank you for your understanding. ** Changed in: fglrx-installer (Ubuntu) Status: Invalid => New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu-X, which is subscribed to fglrx-installer in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1069299 Title: 1002:9613 fglrx-installer not working in Quantal To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fglrx-installer/+bug/1069299/+subscriptions _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
