Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: S3 Graphics Responds About Linux Support

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,435

    Default S3 Graphics Responds About Linux Support

    Phoronix: S3 Graphics Responds About Linux Support

    Last week S3 Graphics had released the Chrome 540 GTX, which is their newest and fastest PCI Express graphics card. Similar to when announcing the S3 Chrome 540 GT, in the Chrome 540 GTX press release they once again mention Linux support along with OpenGL 3.0 capabilities...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzA3MQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,286

    Default

    Just days after the previous news item was posted on Slashdot front page, the plot thickens..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    715

    Default

    For me looks like S3 try to kidding his next customers.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nille View Post
    For me looks like S3 try to kidding his next customers.
    Seems like they're pulling an Epic to me too -- "Here, buy our new UT game, the linux binary is coming out real soon, we promise!".

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,646

    Default

    I don't know who will buy that card. It is not really much cheaper than something from Nvidia or ATI and you can expect that the driver is not really optimized, not even for Win. All VIA/S3 chips before are lowend (onboard mostly) chips, nothing really worth to talk about.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Is this the same S3 of the S3 Virge fame?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    331

    Default

    Ooh boy. First false advertising, now possible GPL violation (copyright infringement).

    S3's in for a world of pain.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,646

    Default

    Depends, only if they kernel module code uses precompiled parts, then the GPL flag would be wrong. Check for .o files. For the Xorg driver you don't need to use GPL code at all.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    331

    Default

    What I understand from the article is that they're releasing a binary kernel module, no source, and labelling it GPLed to get around the kernel build scripts that check for licence compliance. If memory serves me right there's kernel devs who take things like this very seriously.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    302

    Default

    yep if its labeled as GPL in the module and they aren't distributing the source for the binary then they are in for a world of hurt

    cause a binary driver without the source should cause "tainted kernel" logs they aren't serious just notifying kernel devs that you are running a kernel that isn't worth debugging XD

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •