Catalyst 12-3 released

[bridgman]

Not sure... official support for 1.12 is in a later release (in beta now) but I don't know how much of the work made it into Cat 12.3.

You've probably noticed that the delay between X server release and fglrx support is steadily shrinking, but it's not zero yet, at least not for production drivers.

[DaemonFC]

Not sure... official support for 1.12 is in a later release (in beta now) but I don't know how much of the work made it into Cat 12.3.

You've probably noticed that the delay between X server release and fglrx support is steadily shrinking, but it's not zero yet, at least not for production drivers.

Yes, but the ABI breakage hasn't been severe in any particular release in a while to the best of my knowledge, unless I've missed something. Recent X server releases have mostly been bug fixing and cleanup. Major new features seem to never land. If RandR 1.4 ever did land you could still just fudge like you do now and disable the server extension and load your own older one.

I'm not seeing really why Ubuntu is softballing you guys except to encourage you to make life for other distributions harder since the pressure is off to fix up FGLRX for another 6 months.

[foxfire]

Anyone tried the 12.4 OpenCL beta for now?
http://developer.amd.com/Downloads/O...iversLinux.tgz Version 8.96.0

This driver seems to work but you get a "Testing use only" watermark.

Catalyst Version 12.4
OpenGL Version 4.2.11627
Driver Packaging Version 8.96-120315a-135397E

openSUSE 12.1 x86_64
AMD Radeon 7950

[allquixotic]

This driver seems to work but you get a "Testing use only" watermark.

Catalyst Version 12.4
OpenGL Version 4.2.11627
Driver Packaging Version 8.96-120315a-135397E

openSUSE 12.1 x86_64
AMD Radeon 7950

Search forum for "lolsed"

[LinuxID10T]

Dear AMD,

Would it kill any of you idiots to update the documentation instead of shipping some that's 10 years old and lies about what Linux is and refers to Lindows and XFree86?

If you're going to ship this crap that's so outdated that it only serves to increase the download size and make you look retarded, please just strip all of it out. I don't think any of it even applies to a distribution newer than around 2002.

Dude, you just sound like an a$$hat who doesn't know $hit. If you want to troll some people go post pictures of animal abuse on 4chan or something

[DaemonFC]

Dude, you just sound like an a$$hat who doesn't know $hit. If you want to troll some people go post pictures of animal abuse on 4chan or something

I think someone does still use Lindows.

[LinuxID10T]

I think someone does still use Lindows.

Nah, I personally just hate it when people remove legacy support too soon. Personally, I am still pissed that the X devs are removing all non KMS drivers. I figure it takes maybe one person to maintain, and everyone with a legacy card can be happy. Hell, if you think an old card is slow, how about the *CPU* on that old computer... XD

[DaemonFC]

Nah, I personally just hate it when people remove legacy support too soon. Personally, I am still pissed that the X devs are removing all non KMS drivers. I figure it takes maybe one person to maintain, and everyone with a legacy card can be happy. Hell, if you think an old card is slow, how about the *CPU* on that old computer... XD

They haven't ditched UMS drivers completely, Intel still uses UMS on some of their hardware which is ridiculous. (If Voodoo cards from 1998 can use KMS, why can't Intel cards that are only a few years old?). But that's Intel for you.

Even Fedora 17 still supports Intel UMS crap.

Aside from that? Why is it too soon to start talking about removing support for ancient legacy distributions that are so old, they date back to when Bush hadn't spent the US into poverty?

[LinuxID10T]

They haven't ditched UMS drivers completely, Intel still uses UMS on some of their hardware which is ridiculous. (If Voodoo cards from 1998 can use KMS, why can't Intel cards that are only a few years old?). But that's Intel for you.

Even Fedora 17 still supports Intel UMS crap.

Aside from that? Why is it too soon to start talking about removing support for ancient legacy distributions that are so old, they date back to when Bush hadn't spent the US into poverty?

Because what Bridgman said. There are still plenty of PC's with old distributions. Companies will run computers until they don't work anymore. Hell, about a year ago, the Lowes in my area was running PCs with what looked like Red Hat 7. Another good example (not linux but you get the point) is Windows XP. Companies still use it despite the fact that it is over a decade old. As for why it is a pain with the drivers, some people have older graphics cards. I personally am still steaming pretty good from them removing pre-r400 support. The darn parts weren't even 5 years old yet when they did that.

[DaemonFC]

Because what Bridgman said. There are still plenty of PC's with old distributions. Companies will run computers until they don't work anymore. Hell, about a year ago, the Lowes in my area was running PCs with what looked like Red Hat 7. Another good example (not linux but you get the point) is Windows XP. Companies still use it despite the fact that it is over a decade old. As for why it is a pain with the drivers, some people have older graphics cards. I personally am still steaming pretty good from them removing pre-r400 support. The darn parts weren't even 5 years old yet when they did that.

I don't see why AMD should support Linux distributions that have been out of business for many years or abandoned by the people who made them.

They don't support Windows 98? Why do they support Lindows? BTW, I doubt anyone is using Lindows (Also known as Linspire, but AMD still refers to it by its name from 2002), since their repositories have been down since around 4 years ago.

Edit: Come to think of it, they ditched their X.org Server binary interfaces for everything older than X.org Server, like 1.4(?) last year anyway, so it wouldn't even work on some of the distributions they mention in the documentation anyway.