Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31

Thread: Intel Poulsbo DRM Proposed, But Rejected

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sreyan View Post
    You mean a blob driver that drops support for older cards, doesn't get any security review, requires SSE and doesnt work on any architecture other than x86 and amd64?

    - they release a legacy driver and it's updated, maybe it doesn't have new features, but it gets updated. "someone else" doesn't do that.

    - they support opensolaris and freebsd since years and years. "someone else" doesn't even know what solaris and freebsd is.

    - 98% of desktop users are on x86 or amd64. if you want nvidia to release docs for 2% of desktop users, good luck.

    final words: your grandmother has a "normal" computer and wants her gpu to work. she doesn't give a damn of your points because she payed for that damn card.

    Are you able to understand this? no, you're not. give money to companies that sell you bread to get eaten in 5 months. I buy things that work today. good luck and stay safe.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bulletxt View Post
    - they release a legacy driver and it's updated, maybe it doesn't have new features, but it gets updated. "someone else" doesn't do that.

    - they support opensolaris and freebsd since years and years. "someone else" doesn't even know what solaris and freebsd is.

    - 98% of desktop users are on x86 or amd64. if you want nvidia to release docs for 2% of desktop users, good luck.

    final words: your grandmother has a "normal" computer and wants her gpu to work. she doesn't give a damn of your points because she payed for that damn card.

    Are you able to understand this? no, you're not. give money to companies that sell you bread to get eaten in 5 months. I buy things that work today. good luck and stay safe.
    1. Many of the open source drivers support other *nix operating systems.

    2. PPC? Try using your beloved blob on that

    3. My grandmother and I suspect most grandmothers don't have discrete graphics cards. I suspect most of them use IGPs. I'm fairly certain that Intel is the dominant player in the x86/amd64 graphics area, and IIRC they don't have discrete graphics yet.

    4. Actually I do give money to companies that work. intel's igps work great out of the box and are entirely open. Thanks for the personal attack on my intelligence. I appreciate it.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    578

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sreyan View Post
    1. Many of the open source drivers support other *nix operating systems.

    2. PPC? Try using your beloved blob on that

    3. My grandmother and I suspect most grandmothers don't have discrete graphics cards. I suspect most of them use IGPs. I'm fairly certain that Intel is the dominant player in the x86/amd64 graphics area, and IIRC they don't have discrete graphics yet.

    4. Actually I do give money to companies that work. intel's igps work great out of the box and are entirely open. Thanks for the personal attack on my intelligence. I appreciate it.
    My post was actually connected to this article. It was a way to say: "I'm happy there's a comany that does a working driver because I'm getting tired of all these problems, waiting, and so on".

    Also, I have an ati 2600XT gpu. By the time my card works as it should with oss driver, it will be old. Old enough that for a gamer it's time to buy a new card. If I buy a new card it won't work yet with the oss driver cause 99% for sure it won't be ready. In other words I'll be stuck to FGRLX driver. No point reminind that FGLRX isn't a driver.

    So conclusion is, I'm happy there is a company that just does a driver and makes my gpu work today, and tomorrow.

    People are happy of docs, I'm happy of a working driver. Different points of view I guess.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bulletxt View Post
    People are happy of docs, I'm happy of a working driver. Different points of view I guess.
    If you're a gamer I understand your choice to go Nvidia. Wine simply works better with Nvidia in my experience and modern gaming doesnt come to linux in another way. Video rescaling and compiz are the closest things that my usage gets to real 3D so my view point as you said is quite different.

    My experience with linux is that the hardware support is good out of the box. As time goes on less has to be installed manually.I suspect the same thing would be true for windows if drivers were continuously slipstreamed into the install disc. I have some older windows cds that don't even recognize network controllers so I can't even download the drivers to get the system to work.

    For a gamer non working or slow 3d is a deal breaker. For me I just care that my system works well out of the box; Since fast 3d isn't one of my needs, but 2d and video is, i'm extremely interested in open source drivers going in.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    121

    Default

    Seems like Greg Kroah Hartman might shove this in staging anyways by simply cloning a poulsbo specific copy of drm.

    http://groups.google.com/group/fa.li...50330204cbc2af

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    142

    Default

    Isn't it ironic that GKH was the developer who a couple of years ago proposed disallowing any non-GPL-compatible module to be loaded by Linux? And now he wants to include a kernel DRM driver whose sole purpose is to interact with a binary blob 3D driver.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,645

    Default

    Well basically it should not get rejected because the DRM part is full GPL and the Xorg part uses the binary blob. There is at least no licence issue with the kernel module. If you want to maintain it when the Xorg part is based on closed source thats another question. To get the hardware working you need it, and if you find it in official drm, staging or distro specific addon it does not matter for the user. I would just work on more distros out of the box when it is in mainline or staging.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    847

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Well basically it should not get rejected because the DRM part is full GPL and the Xorg part uses the binary blob. There is at least no licence issue with the kernel module.
    From the article and airlied's comments, the reason for the NAK seems not to be the code or the license. It was insufficient explanations for the proposed drm changes, and lack of official statements from Intel regarding their plans/roadmap for that driver.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    128

    Default

    Any updates on the GMA500 saga/scam?

    I'm one of the suckers who got stung by this by buying a Mini 10. "Intel graphics?" I thought "that'll work great with Linux!"- heh!

    So I'm stuck on Dell's custom version of Hardy, I can't get xrandr to do any better than 576p on my HDTV, HDMI sound output doesn't work and I get frequent freezes. A very poor state of affairs indeed! I hope my Pandora will fare better when it finally arrives!.

    I thought Intel were serious about supporting Linux? This has made all Linux users have to think twice now about recommending Intel IGPs for their xorg friendliness.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Berlin, Germany
    Posts
    847

    Default

    The current recommendation is still that Linux users stay away from Intel Poulsbo/GMA500/US15W chipsets.

    New developments in the meantime since the article was posted:


    If I understand correctly, no plans exist to open source the proprietary parts. And if things will go the same route as the last proprietary PowerVR Linux driver, then you will be stuck with basic 2D forever.

Posting Permissions

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