I only use hardy + intrepid target, but intrepid should work as well. Basically the latest karmic target would use external qt4 libs, intrepid target uses internal ones, that does not matter. Also karmic would use execstack protection which is usually not preinstalled on older systems.
Could you guys test Compiz's Window Blur? I wanna know if they really broke it.
They really broke it.
The question is imho what makes Compiz blur so special? I read in the "Compiz blur with fglrx"-thread that it requires OpenGL 2.0 to work. This should be no problem for fglrx. So I'd really like to know, why fgrlx has such problems with Compiz blur. By the way, is it just the blur-implementation within Compiz or is it really impossible to get alpha blur working on e.g. OGL 1.5 or even 1.4?
Originally Posted by unimatrix
Another thing, did they at least fix the issue where it was not possible to have two X sessions to run at the same time? (for example starting the guest session concurrently)
The xserver-backclear patch is still needed as well as it seems.
3D performance and Power management are looking OK to me though. I still don't know, why aticonfig does not allow me to set the clocks as low as the windows driver offers it, but as long as the fan is quiet, I am pretty much satisfied.
yeah, that same thing was fixed to let the arch linux AUR build work. when the author of the AUR build file got report of this problem. it was fixed and made working in less than a day. http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=29111
The driver itself might work okay. fglrx usually work fine with my computer. But the driver broke the deb packaging :S Thats quite important for most Ubuntu / Debian users, who wants to keep their system clean.
I expect a hotfix for this driver, because of the "Ubuntu 9.10 production support" label. Don't get me wrong, I like fglrx. But labeling a driver production ready, when it even can't be packaged for the system is kinda unprofessional.