Peter Terpstra

Dear readers,

I try to install the ATI driver on opensuse 10.3

After intalling the right packages for 10.3
ati-fglrxG01-kmp-default-8.42.3_2.6.22.9_0.4-1.1
x11-video-fglrxG01-8.42.3-2.1
i give:
#aticonfig --initial --input=/etc/X11/xorg.conf
#sax2 -r -m 0=fglrx

Sax2 does not want to startup!
At the last ten lines frm the Sax2log i find:
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 01:00:0
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Version Identifier:8.42.3
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Release Identifier:
UNSUPPORTED-8.423.2
(II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Build Date: Oct 19 2007 16:13:26
(WW) fglrx: No matching Device section for instance (BusID
PCI:1:0:1) found
(EE) No devices detected.

Fatal server error:
no screens found
]
#End

Card:
RV280 [Radeon 9200 SE]
xorg version : xorg-x11-7.2

Please tell me if you would like to have some kind of info:

TIA

Peter



--
mailtoeter@dharma.dyndns.info

Nikos Chantziaras

Peter Terpstra wrote:
> Dear readers,
>
> I try to install the ATI driver on opensuse 10.3
>
> After intalling the right packages for 10.3
> ati-fglrxG01-kmp-default-8.42.3_2.6.22.9_0.4-1.1
> x11-video-fglrxG01-8.42.3-2.1
> i give:
> #aticonfig --initial --input=/etc/X11/xorg.conf
> #sax2 -r -m 0=fglrx
>
> Sax2 does not want to startup!
> At the last ten lines frm the Sax2log i find:
> (II) Primary Device is: PCI 01:00:0
> (II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Version Identifier:8.42.3
> (II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Release Identifier:
> UNSUPPORTED-8.423.2
> (II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Build Date: Oct 19 2007 16:13:26
> (WW) fglrx: No matching Device section for instance (BusID
> PCI:1:0:1) found
> (EE) No devices detected.
>
> Fatal server error:
> no screens found
> ]
> #End
>
> Card:
> RV280 [Radeon 9200 SE]
> xorg version : xorg-x11-7.2

Your card is an old model and is no longer supported by ATI (not only in
Linux; the Windows drivers also don't support this card anymore). You
need to install older drivers that still support the card. Go here:

http://ati.amd.com/support/driver.html

And select Linux/Radeon/9200. You'll see that the last version of the
ATI drivers that supported that card is version 8.28.8 (Aug. 18, 2006).

Peter Terpstra

Peter Terpstra in <1740337.OBoGdheJzr@dharma> :


> Please tell me if you would like to have some kind of info:
#rmmod radeon
#modprobe fglrx
FATAL: Error inserting fglrx
(/lib/modules/2.6.22.12-0.1-default/weak-updates/fglrx.ko): Operation not
permitted

P.


--
mailtoeter@dharma.dyndns.info

Peter Terpstra

Nikos Chantziaras in <fi2ebh$8kj$1@volcano1.grnet.gr> :

> And select Linux/Radeon/9200. *You'll see that the last version of the
> ATI drivers that supported that card is version 8.28.8 (Aug. 18, 2006).

Okay thanks but i tried this before, the kernel does not want to compile.

Also not after this retry:
/usr/X11R6/bin/fglrx-kernel-build.sh

f input
make[3]: *** [/usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx/firegl_public.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [_module_/usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx] Error 2
make[1]: *** [_all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.6.22.12-0.1-obj/i386/default'

******************************
Build of kernel module failed!
******************************

Are there still optons to try or should i give up?


Kind Regards,

Peter


--
mailtoeter@dharma.dyndns.info

Nikos Chantziaras

Peter Terpstra wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras in <fi2ebh$8kj$1@volcano1.grnet.gr> :
>
>> And select Linux/Radeon/9200. You'll see that the last version of the
>> ATI drivers that supported that card is version 8.28.8 (Aug. 18, 2006).
>
> Okay thanks but i tried this before, the kernel does not want to compile.
>
> Also not after this retry:
> /usr/X11R6/bin/fglrx-kernel-build.sh
>
> f input
> make[3]: *** [/usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx/firegl_public.o] Error 1
> make[2]: *** [_module_/usr/src/kernel-modules/fglrx] Error 2
> make[1]: *** [_all] Error 2
> make: *** [all] Error 2
> make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.6.22.12-0.1-obj/i386/default'
>
> ******************************
> Build of kernel module failed!
> ******************************
>
> Are there still optons to try or should i give up?

I think you can give up :P Those old drivers don't compile on recent
kernels.

Any special reason you don't use the open source driver? It should
support 3D acceleration on that card (you can enable 3D in SaX).

Peter Terpstra

Nikos Chantziaras in <fi2jeq$bnj$1@volcano1.grnet.gr> :

> I think you can give up :P Those old drivers don't compile on recent
> kernels.

Thats bad(!), even if i try a vanilla kernel?
And tha for a card thats only two years old.

> Any special reason you don't use the open source driver? *It should
> support 3D acceleration on that card (you can enable 3D in SaX).

I would like to use the TV-out.

Kind regards,

Peter

--
mailtoeter@dharma.dyndns.info

Nikos Chantziaras

Peter Terpstra wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras in <fi2jeq$bnj$1@volcano1.grnet.gr> :
>
>> I think you can give up :P Those old drivers don't compile on recent
>> kernels.
>
> Thats bad(!), even if i try a vanilla kernel?

Could be, but I don't know what the highest supported kernel version is.

It also says "XFree86 4.3 and X.Org 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1". Who knows
if it will run in 7.2.


> And tha for a card thats only two years old.

The 9200 was released around the end of 2003 or early 2004, but was
exactly the same as the older 9000, only with an AGP 8x interface. ATI
just put a "9" in front of the model name, but in reality this card is
not part of the 9xxx family. In effect, it's an 8500.

Peter Terpstra

Nikos Chantziaras in <fi3etk$k1i$1@volcano1.grnet.gr> :


> Could be, but I don't know what the highest supported kernel version is.
>
> It also says "XFree86 4.3 and X.Org 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 7.0, 7.1". *Who knows
> if it will run in 7.2.

Oh yes it does, it can be forced with the "X_VERSION=x710" variable.

>> And tha for a card thats only two years old.
>
> The 9200 was released around the end of 2003 or early 2004, but was
> exactly the same as the older 9000, only with an AGP 8x interface. *ATI
> just put a "9" in front of the model name, but in reality this card is
> not part of the 9xxx family. *In effect, it's an 8500.

rpm -qpi fglrx_6_9_0_SUSE101-8.33.6-1.i386.rpm:
Summary : X Window display driver for the ATI graphics accelerators
Description :
Display driver files for the ATI RADEON (8500 and later), MOBILITY RADEON
(M9 and later), RADEON XPRESS IGP and FireGL series of graphics graphics
accelerators. This package provides 2D display drivers, precompiled kernel
modules, kernel module build environment, control panel source coude and
hardware accelerated OpenGL.
Distribution: (none)

Kind regards,

Peter


--
mailtoeter@dharma.dyndns.info

Chris

Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> I think you can give up :P Those old drivers don't compile on recent
> kernels.

And that is why I hate ATI. I will not buy another ATI video card until I
read reports that their driver is as at least as good as nVidia's.

What frustrates me is that I buy an ATI video card and by the time ATI gets
their act together and produces a module that supports its features, they
deprecate the model! What the hell is up with that?

Everything that I have read and been told (in person) about the nvidia
driver is that it seemlessly installs without any hassle. Perhaps ATI
should call up nvidia and ask nicely how they do it. Or better yet, ATI
should get more than 1 guy[1] to write the freaking module!



[1] I don't know if it's really just 1 guy, but it sure does seem like it.
--
Chris

Nikos Chantziaras

Chris wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> I think you can give up :P Those old drivers don't compile on recent
>> kernels.
>
> And that is why I hate ATI. I will not buy another ATI video card until I
> read reports that their driver is as at least as good as nVidia's.

It's a shame, really, because their hardware *is* awesome. But it gets
wasted in Linux due to the drivers. The situation is very frustrating.
I hoped to see better drivers after AMD bought ATI, but it's been a
while and still nothing! We don't even want all the features that are
in the MS Windows drivers; we just want the *basics* to work correctly!