"Testing Use Only" Watermark information -- http://www.phoronix.com/?page=news_item&px=NTkwNg
Code:Section "Screen" Identifier "screen1" Device "device1" Monitor "monitor1" DefaultColorDepth 24 ]Subsection "Display" Depth 24 Modes "1280x1024" "1152x864" "1024x768" "832x624" "800x600" "640x480" "480x360" "320x240" EndSubsection
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety,deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Ben Franklin 1755
Michael Help Me!!
I am using ATI 9550 card..I installed the 8.39.4 driver with Xorg 126.96.36.199-9 on my Fedora 7,when system begins to start xorg, my screen shows "No signal" then the screen turns to be black..
I checked the Xorg.0.log,nothing wrong (EE) shows in that log file..
I downgrade Xorg to version 1.2 and reinstalled the 8.39.4 driver ,problem's the same.
I uninstalled fglrx 8.39.4 and installed 8.38.7,then the driver works fine..
what is the problem??
Nothing goes wrong when the Xorg starts and loads the fglrx driver,but why there is no signal???
The good news of this release is that the EDID hex dump I get in my xorg log when using 1.3 isn't just 00FF000...0 anymore which suggests they are making progress in fixing (what I believe to be) this problem with certain rigs getting blank screens.
The bad news is I still get a blank screen with 1.3. I'll go ahead and give some more technical details to make up for my ranting below.
As of 1.3 there's no longer a separate DDC module for display detection. It's now built-in to the server itself. It seems (judging from my 1.1.1 log) fglrx likes being able to load the ddc module and probe the display.
Without a DesktopSetup line in my xorg.conf I get a message that two displays were detected, forcing clone mode. If I force single with the aforementioned line it gives some other error I don't have handy. I've only got one display connected and regardless of DesktopSetup and ForceMonitors it still chokes right after this stage.
These companies (AMD and Nvidia) are complete morons in the grand scheme of things, for their behavior over the drivers for their hardware in linux. There's two reasons:
1. This hardware is useless without proficient drivers behind it. I could be handed a graphics card capable of running a complete model of the visible universe at 1,000,000 fps but without a driver to use it, it might as well be a box of animal crackers. (Actually, the animal crackers would be better, you can eat those)
2. This is a community that is driven by the efforts of its members. That's the idea behind linux, that collectively working together can build software solutions that enable amazing things.
Who knows how many more people would get sucked in to making linux games and doing graphics work on the platform if it had proper support from that industry?
For now, at least, it looks like we won't find out. That's the shame of it because there are plenty of people who try to give detailed reports of their rigs, configs, and results and we don't have any idea if the developers are even listening or what the real problems holding things up are.
We do know they didn't take the finished driver and manually install it the way many of us do. That I can't explain. I understand that mistakes happen in building drivers or any type of software. Last semester I wrote a program in assembly that was wrong for exactly one input in 4,294,967,296. It happens.
But as soon as I was aware of the error I was able to fix it. That's the virtue of open source that is one of the driving forces that brings people to linux. The fact that we aren't crippled into waiting for a monthly driver to see if the man behind the curtain has sprinkled the right amount of fairy dust in with the beanstalk beans to make the damn thing work. That, if there's a problem, anyone with the know-how and tenacity can fix it and we can all benefit from it.
Then go and work as a fglrx project leader. As far as I know, they are currently looking for one.
Well, it looks like 8.39.4 is being recalled basically... AMD has asked it be pulled from repos.
So if you haven't downloaded the driver yet and rely upon distribution-specific packaging, wait and use the Avivo driver or the 8.38.7 driver.
I am, surprise by this comment, there is no project leader? This is not a very good sign, it seems, these days, every time I read about ATI for Linux, it is always bad news.
Anyway, my company (due to my recommendation), had ordered 4 laptops (3 more are coming), all running Intel (CPU + Graphics).
Well now.... and who says it's working on FC7?
i get exact same behavior
ABI class: X.Org XInput driver, version 0.6
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 01:00:0
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Version Identifier:8.39.4
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Release Identifier: UNSUPPORTED-8.393.1
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Build Date: Jul 18 2007 14:41:23
0: X(xf86SigHandler+0x6d) [0x48b99d]
1: /lib64/libc.so.6 [0x2aaaab60e630]
2: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so(atiddxSave64BitBAR+0x2d) [0x2aaaacd4cb8d]
3: /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers//fglrx_drv.so(atiddxProbeMain+0x37f) [0x2aaaacd57a7f]
4: X(InitOutput+0x6e7) [0x463707]
5: X(main+0x275) [0x434625]
6: /lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf4) [0x2aaaab5fbab4]
7: X(FontFileCompleteXLFD+0x229) [0x433ad9]
Fatal server error:
Caught signal 11. Server aborting
anyone can help?