Catalyst 10.1 seems to be out

[Qaridarium]

It's not EXA or anything like it. Something else entirely.

i do not say its exa... something like exa...

whatever it makes 2D faster... and its not so outdatet like XAA...

[Melcar]

But it's nothing "like" EXA. They're using something completely different. And the way things are at the moment, it will take some time for the new accel. method to be ready and proper. I really doubt it will be the default by 10.2 or even 10.3.

[krionius]

Anyone interested, this seems to work with the mobility hd 5xxx,at least my 5650 is working with it. Needs manual xorg.conf and give a transparent icon in X bottom right corner telling Unsupported hw). Check the other thread for more.

[cutterjohn]

here we go again...

dpkg-shlibdeps: error: couldn't find library libatiuki.so.1 needed by debian/xorg-driver-fglrx/usr/lib/xorg/modules/linux/libfglrxdrm.so (ELF format: 'elf64-x86-64'; RPATH: '').

Have to look at it later when I have more time...

[DarkFoss]

Hmm almost the same error as cutterjohn.
--buildpkg Mandriva/2010.0 rpm's build without issue (64bit) but cannot install

- x11-driver-video-fglrx-8.690-1amd.mdv2010.0.x86_64 (due to unsatisfied libatiuki.so.1()(64bit))

[nbi1]

Of course package generation for Debian Squeeze is broken. Tried 'testing' too, of course it's also broken.

[Kano]

Useless effort anyway as the xserver in Debian testing is not supported.

[nbi1]

Useless effort anyway as the xserver in Debian testing is not supported.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly do you base this on?

Currently under Squeeze I'm running:
xserver-xorg 1:7.4+4
xserver-xorg-core 2:1.6.5-1

The Catalyst 10.1 Release Notes require:
XOrg 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 or 7.4

Granted I haven't built X from source in a very long time and the current numbering scheme is less than clear, but these bits seem to indicate I have a 7.4 xorg version which the 10.1 Release Notes identify.

Ok, you might say the core server is unsupported. Ubuntu Karmic is supported by Catalyst 10.1, yes? If we look at the package xserver-xorg (1:7.4+3ubuntu7) we see a core server requirement of xserver-xorg-core (>= 2:1.5.99.901). In fact the Karmic core server is 1.6.4.

So it looks like the squeeze Xorg is just a hair newer than Karmic's. In fact based on Karmic's xserver-xorg-core requirement 1.6.5 should work.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, but based on this info I'm just not reaching the same conclusion.

[nbi1]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but what exactly do you base this on?

Currently under Squeeze I'm running:
xserver-xorg 1:7.4+4
xserver-xorg-core 2:1.6.5-1

The Catalyst 10.1 Release Notes require:
XOrg 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 or 7.4

Granted I haven't built X from source in a very long time and the current numbering scheme is less than clear, but these bits seem to indicate I have a 7.4 xorg version which the 10.1 Release Notes identify.

Ok, you might say the core server is unsupported. Ubuntu Karmic is supported by Catalyst 10.1, yes? If we look at the package xserver-xorg (1:7.4+3ubuntu7) we see a core server requirement of xserver-xorg-core (>= 2:1.5.99.901). In fact the Karmic core server is 1.6.4.

So it looks like the squeeze Xorg is just a hair newer than Karmic's. In fact based on Karmic's xserver-xorg-core requirement 1.6.5 should work.

I just confirmed that the squeeze 1.6.5 core xserver works just fine under Karmic. Even with the 1.6.4 Radeon driver. Apparently 1.6.4 and 1.6.5 aren't so different as to cause problems. Which leads me to believe the fglrx from Catalyst 10.1 would be just fine for squeeze if I could only build it.

[Kano]

It's even newer than lucid and since about 5 months fglrx does not work with Xserver 1.7.x. Ask some Fedora users