I have a GTX260, and I have no idea if 3D works on it on Nouveau. I wish I still had my 8600 (I gave it away) because that seems to be a commonly-working card.
Also, I need VDPAU, but I'm looking forward to trying Nouveau on Fedora 12 Live CD and of course on Ubuntu 10.04.
I agree this article sounded really negative towards Red Hat, and there was no reason for it to do so.
"Although the ctx_voodoo may still have legal issues surrounding it, we've discovered that many older cards don't even require this and are perfectly legal to use in the latest kernel!"
"Red Hat was just attempting to ignore this little fact."
You managed to get the important information across to your readers, but it sounded like you were taking a pot shot at Red Hat and accusing them of something nefarious.
GTX 260 = NVA0, which has the most complete Gallium3D and shader support. Currently stuff that I have working: openarena, nexuiz, compiz, neverball, urban terror. Stuff not working: warsow (but it looks like it will soon), stellarium (seems like nv50 is missing few tgsi opcodes, such as 'ret' call which is where it bombs out). I still need to try UT2004.
Originally Posted by 3rdalbum
I currently use nouveau on my
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: nVidia Corporation G72 [GeForce 7300 SE/7200 GS] (rev a1)
Interestingly, I had some success getting 3D to work with 2.6.31-rc9, but 2.6.32 broke it completely (both the nouveau branch).
I too wanted to know what evil plot they would have for holding back a driver? By all means, they want Linux to succeed, so unless there are (more) scams, politics, and well, flat out money and greed going around that I don't know about, I'm curious to hear what your theory is on this. Why would they attempt to ignore this fact? Maybe they weren't aware, and made a mistake? But as others have said, it sounds like there was a lot of opposition to the driver moving forward.
Originally Posted by smitty3268
All I know is I want and expect the kernel to be good quality, and so do maaaaaaaaaany individuals and companies of course, so I would expect rejection of a lot of code until it's quality, which is what happens. However, I don't like the unstable API preventing the easy testing of drivers outside the kernel. I expect open source software to give you more freedom and flexibility than that. And I don't buy into the reasons of "they can't", they purposefully do it to try to urge drivers to be open sourced. While I'm grateful for that urging, it shouldn't come at the cost of liberty. (and yes I disagree with copyright law in general, too)
Oh, and I will be testing the driver on a GF 9800GT.
i use nouveau with Mandriva 2010.0
cpu : AMD 64 X2 5000+
my card : Asus, passive cooling, 8600GT
my screen : Philips 170C lcd 17 " , 1024x768
environment : kde 4.3.2
- installation ok
- temperature : same as nvidia driver +- 1°C
temperature monitored with nvclock
- video sd (video dvd,dragon player) : ok
- video hd (tv with vlc) : ok
- video .mov : ok
- photo jpg : ok
- flashplayer sd, hd : ok
- full screen <-> window switching : ok
- screen energy saving
. level 1 or 2 (my lcd has only one level) : ok
. switch off does not work (kde4 ?, powerdevil ? or not this feature with my screen ? )
- suspend to ram : ok
- 2 video output (dvi) are well seen (i did not test, ihave not 2 screens)
- screen rotation : does not work (perhaps not this feature with my screen ?)
- performance : slower than nvidia driver with Google Earth which uses 3D features
No I didn't say you did...just others who decided to take it upon themselves to raise hell with Red hat over this
Originally Posted by Apopas
michael: the problem was when you said that Red Hat is 'trying to ignore this little fact'. There's many things wrong with that sentence.
One, it's not entirely on RH to upstream this code in the first place. You seem to be assuming nouveau is some kind of RH pet project. It's not. Nouveau did not originate as an RH project and it's not in any way owned by RH now. We hired one of the lead nouveau developers (Ben Skeggs) in order to support his work on nouveau, but we didn't take over the project or anything, and there are still other important nouveau developers who do not work for Red Hat. So it seems odd to talk only about Red Hat here.
Two, you are inferring a motivation from limited (or non-existent) evidence and stating it as fact. You have no idea whether Red Hat was 'ignoring' this, and - as Dave replied - in fact he and Ben weren't.
Three, the overall tone of the sentence - especially the sarcastic use of 'little' - is clearly negative; even if this wasn't intentional, it was clearly the effect, as multiple comments in this thread indicate.