Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: New xorg makes fglrx fail

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    36

    Default New xorg makes fglrx fail

    As I feared, the newly arrived xorg-server-core 1.3 in debian sid makes fglrx fail. Install of driver goes without error, but xorg startup fails with this message:

    Code:
    (II) LoadModule: "fglrx"
    (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so
    (II) Module fglrx: vendor="FireGL - ATI Technologies Inc."
    	compiled for 7.1.0, module version = 8.36.5
    	Module class: X.Org Video Driver
    	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 1.0
    [atiddxSetup] X version mismatch - detected X.org 1.3.0.0, required X.org 7.1.0.0
    (II) UnloadModule: "fglrx"
    (II) Unloading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so
    (EE) Failed to load module "fglrx" (module requirement mismatch, 0)
    Ideally we can create a patch for the fglrx installer, unless this is hard coded into the binaries.

    Any ideas? I'll take a look through the package installer stuff to see if I can find what might be patchable, but hopefully someone can give some pointers, since at this point the ATI installer is simply not working.

    Needless to say, nvidia handled this and had a workaround option in place a long time ago, so nvidia is installing great, even on 2.6.21-rc7 stuff.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,046

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gfxdrone View Post
    As I feared, the newly arrived xorg-server-core 1.3 in debian sid makes fglrx fail. Install of driver goes without error, but xorg startup fails with this message:

    Code:
    (II) LoadModule: "fglrx"
    (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so
    (II) Module fglrx: vendor="FireGL - ATI Technologies Inc."
    	compiled for 7.1.0, module version = 8.36.5
    	Module class: X.Org Video Driver
    	ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 1.0
    [atiddxSetup] X version mismatch - detected X.org 1.3.0.0, required X.org 7.1.0.0
    (II) UnloadModule: "fglrx"
    (II) Unloading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so
    (EE) Failed to load module "fglrx" (module requirement mismatch, 0)
    Ideally we can create a patch for the fglrx installer, unless this is hard coded into the binaries.

    Any ideas? I'll take a look through the package installer stuff to see if I can find what might be patchable, but hopefully someone can give some pointers, since at this point the ATI installer is simply not working.

    Needless to say, nvidia handled this and had a workaround option in place a long time ago, so nvidia is installing great, even on 2.6.21-rc7 stuff.
    This appears to be the same problem that FC 7's undergoing right now. You're going to have to wait for AMD to come out with a fix because it's in the blob that is completely closed source. Nice, isn't it?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Thanks for the information, I was afraid it was in the blob, but was hoping it was in the packaging components.

    The level of sheer and utter <fill in your favorite term here> in ATI linux driver development is completely astounding to me. It's been known for months that this new Xorg numbering syntax exists, but they didn't handle it, waiting for it to just fail, like it is now doing.

    Apparently the Debian generated (as opposed to ati installer script generated debs) debs are still working with the new xorg, though they tend to be a lot less reliable, and are generally out of date. <update>No, these fail too, so there are no working fglrx drivers now for the 1.3 labeled xorg.

    Nvidia stuff is working great with the new xorg, not even a hiccup.
    Last edited by gfxdrone; 04-21-2007 at 09:17 PM.

  4. #4

    Default

    Sad day ain't it

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    11

    Default

    That's what you get with closed source drivers.

    Which is why I am stuck on an x300 (hopefully x800 if eBay keeps going as it is :-).

    Hopefully when the Nouveau driver is ready, we will have some good up-to-date nVidia stuff with open drivers. It's a shame that there is so much trouble getting the open Radeon driver up-to-date.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Svartalf View Post
    This appears to be the same problem that FC 7's undergoing right now. You're going to have to wait for AMD to come out with a fix because it's in the blob that is completely closed source. Nice, isn't it?
    If it's just the version check that is a problem, while the ABI is binary compatible, would it not be possible to hex-edit out the string compare routines?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Some guys over here seem to have developed a binary patch http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33889029
    Last edited by uhoh; 04-23-2007 at 04:36 PM. Reason: spell fix

Posting Permissions

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