sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
- From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
- To: SM-Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
- Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 20:05:59 -0700
Quoting Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>:
<snip>
> I've got it compiling for my ati card (xorg radeon driver). Will let you
> know
> how it goes.
>
> Gentoo mentions[0] that neither nVIDIA's nor ATi's binary drivers work with
> the
> new dllloader, perhaps this information is a bit old as we have a reported
> case
> of at least nVIDIA's binary driver working.
>
> More information on dllloader can be found in FreeDesktop.Org's bugzilla[1]
> and
> one of the developers' pages[2].
>
> -sandalle
>
> [0] http://www.gentoo.ro/proj/en/hardened/hardenedxorg.xml
> [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=400
> [2] http://freedesktop.org/~ajax/dlloader-status.txt
Worked fine here for radeon drivers. :)
I think this should probably be optional as the bug from FreeDesktop.Org
mentions that it's not yet complete.
-sandalle
--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
, (continued)
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/07/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, sergey, 04/07/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/07/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/07/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, sergey, 04/08/2005
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.