Mailing List Archive

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 19:35 -0400, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Thursday I plan to request that the x86 and amd64 arch teams mark the
> latest gentoo-sources-2.6.22 revision stable. We have no reported
> regressions for this kernel release.

I haven't been able to get ati-drivers to compile against a 2.6.22
kernel. Seems to be for similar reasons as
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181982

error: linux/ioctl32.h: No such file or directory

Not sure if bumping the ati-drivers package will address that. But I
could see that potentially being a problem for 2.6.22 stabilization.

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> Not sure if bumping the ati-drivers package will address that. But I
> could see that potentially being a problem for 2.6.22 stabilization.
>

ati-drivers is a couple of releases behind in the tree - the latest
versions have been fixed to work with kernel 2.6.22. Check out
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183480

j.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> I haven't been able to get ati-drivers to compile against a 2.6.22
> kernel. Seems to be for similar reasons as
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181982
>
> error: linux/ioctl32.h: No such file or directory

I already approved a patch against current stable for this:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182597

Theres only so much I can do... Any help prodding the maintainers is
appreciated.

Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Daniel Drake wrote:
> William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
>> I haven't been able to get ati-drivers to compile against a 2.6.22
>> kernel. Seems to be for similar reasons as
>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181982
>>
>> error: linux/ioctl32.h: No such file or directory
>
> I already approved a patch against current stable for this:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182597
>
> Theres only so much I can do... Any help prodding the maintainers is
> appreciated.
>
> Daniel
There are no maintainers of ati-drivers. So you're not prodding anyone.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 09:36 -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Daniel Drake wrote:
> > William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> >> I haven't been able to get ati-drivers to compile against a 2.6.22
> >> kernel. Seems to be for similar reasons as
> >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=181982
> >>
> >> error: linux/ioctl32.h: No such file or directory
> >
> > I already approved a patch against current stable for this:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=182597
> >
> > Theres only so much I can do... Any help prodding the maintainers is
> > appreciated.
> >
> > Daniel
> There are no maintainers of ati-drivers. So you're not prodding anyone.

Unmaintained and broken... sounds like a candidate for removal.

NVIDIA FTW!!!

*grin*

No, seriously. If this is holding us back, I'll do the commits provided
I can find people to help me with testing. This is for the very short
term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
never intend on purchasing.

--
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation

Doug Goldstein wrote:
> There are no maintainers of ati-drivers. So you're not prodding anyone.

Luca? Did you stop maintaining it?

Thanks,
Donnie

On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 07:35:16PM -0400, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Thursday I plan to request that the x86 and amd64 arch teams mark the
> latest gentoo-sources-2.6.22 revision stable. We have no reported
> regressions for this kernel release.

Is speakup finally dropped from the gentoo tree in this release?

Was there a reason for this?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 09:54 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > If this is holding us back, I'll do the commits provided
> I can find people to help me with testing.

I am willing to help. I got a 2.6.22 kernel I want to boot to test out
the new mac80211 stuff vs the older softmac. The ati-driver issue is the
only thing holding me back. Just haven't had a chance to apply patches
per bug, and bump ebuild locally to test.

If it's in an overlay, or tree, surely happy to sync and test :)

> This is for the very short
> term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
> never intend on purchasing.

Well seems most AMD machines are likely to ship with ATI chipsets these
days. For sure most lappies :)

Interesting side note. Beryl/Xgl works on my laptop, ATI Xpress200m. Had
it working once on my two workstations. Both with nVidia chipsets, and
nothing special, but nothing that old either. First time I have had more
problems with nVidia vs ATI.

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java

Greg KH wrote:
> Is speakup finally dropped from the gentoo tree in this release?

Yes

> Was there a reason for this?

It no longer compiles, as the legacy way of accessing serial ports
disappeared, serial is now a platform device. I can't see an easy fix.

It may return in future, in a different form. I suggested some future
direction here:

http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2007-July/044137.html

Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 09:54 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> No, seriously. If this is holding us back, I'll do the commits
> provided
> I can find people to help me with testing. This is for the very short
> term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
> never intend on purchasing.

I'm running it on my laptop with a 9600/9700 Mobility (it has an
identity crisis I guess)... Works fine after applying the patch..

--
Homer Parker <hparker@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 06:35:04PM -0400, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > Is speakup finally dropped from the gentoo tree in this release?
>
> Yes
>
> > Was there a reason for this?
>
> It no longer compiles, as the legacy way of accessing serial ports
> disappeared, serial is now a platform device. I can't see an easy fix.
>
> It may return in future, in a different form. I suggested some future
> direction here:
>
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/pipermail/speakup/2007-July/044137.html

Ok, thanks for pointing me at this. I've already started discussing
this with a few of the users on that list. I tried a number of years to
get this code into shape enough to get into the main kernel tree. Looks
like I'll try this again.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Greg KH wrote:
> Ok, thanks for pointing me at this. I've already started discussing
> this with a few of the users on that list. I tried a number of years to
> get this code into shape enough to get into the main kernel tree. Looks
> like I'll try this again.

Let me know if anything comes of it. I'm interested in helping
development again, but don't presently have enough time to do the
restructuring needed now.

Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

William L. Thomson Jr. ha scritto:
>> This is for the very short
>> term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
>> never intend on purchasing.
>>
>
> Well seems most AMD machines are likely to ship with ATI chipsets these
> days. For sure most lappies :)
>
> Interesting side note. Beryl/Xgl works on my laptop, ATI Xpress200m.
cool... would you like to write a pair of lines describing the process,
software (ebuilds) versions used, tips and quirks? cause I tried many
time but always failes someway, so that I started to think ati-drivers
for X200M are bork :S

--
0xff

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 20:09 +0200, federico ferri wrote:
> William L. Thomson Jr. ha scritto:
> >> This is for the very short
> >> term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
> >> never intend on purchasing.
> >>
> >
> > Well seems most AMD machines are likely to ship with ATI chipsets these
> > days. For sure most lappies :)
> >
> > Interesting side note. Beryl/Xgl works on my laptop, ATI Xpress200m.
> cool... would you like to write a pair of lines describing the process,
> software (ebuilds) versions used, tips and quirks?

Yeah I might see about documenting it at some point, but I basically
just followed the wiki. Although it's still a little quirky wrt to
starting beryl-xgl, and beryl-manager during log in. But that kinda
gives me a choice when I log in to start metacity or beryl :)

> cause I tried many
> time but always failes someway, so that I started to think ati-drivers
> for X200M are bork :S

Nah, it's all about your config. If that sucker is not dialed in it will
blow. It took me forever to get mine to where it's at. Still some stuff
left like dialing in dual monitors and etc. Here is my current
xorg.conf. It's still kinda a mess, but should help out.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~wltjr/misc/xpress200m_xorg.conf

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java

On Wednesday 01 August 2007, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 09:54 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > This is for the very short
> > term. I don't want to maintain a driver for hardware I don't own and
> > never intend on purchasing.
>
> Well seems most AMD machines are likely to ship with ATI chipsets these
> days. For sure most lappies :)

maybe, but irrelevant i think

if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help and no
Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?
-mike

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:31:09 -0400
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help
> and no Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?

There's an open-source driver for the r5xx stuff called the avivo
driver [1]. It's still pretty rough, so I haven't packaged it yet. For
anyone interested, it should be pretty easy to make an ebuild for it
based on the xf86-video-ati ebuild and the git eclass.

For the present, je_fro's picked up ati-drivers and anarchy's been
sending changes for some of the newest stuff.

Thanks,
Donnie

1. http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=avivo/xf86-video-avivo.git;a=summary

On Thursday 02 August 2007, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help
> > and no Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?
>
> There's an open-source driver for the r5xx stuff called the avivo
> driver [1]. It's still pretty rough, so I haven't packaged it yet. For
> anyone interested, it should be pretty easy to make an ebuild for it
> based on the xf86-video-ati ebuild and the git eclass.
>
> For the present, je_fro's picked up ati-drivers and anarchy's been
> sending changes for some of the newest stuff.

sounds good to me ... so to tie back to the source of the thread, crappy
closed source vendor drivers are not a valid reason to hold up stabilization
of a kernel

if the issue affects you:
(1) complain to the vendor
(2) help make the package work with the new kernel
(3) dont buy the hardware
(4) stop bugging the kernel developers
(5) give me a hug
(6) goto 5
-mike

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 20:05 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> sounds good to me ... so to tie back to the source of the thread, crappy
> closed source vendor drivers are not a valid reason to hold up stabilization
> of a kernel

Who ever said they were crappy? Maybe the documentation on usage is
crappy, but drivers have consistently gotten much better. These days
pretty solid IMHO for my uses.

They just did not compile against 2.6.22 due to some files being moved
around or etc. I happen to like the drivers, and they are the only thing
I can use to get DRI from my hardware.

Last I checked there was a version of ati-drivers available for stable
systems. So by stabilizing 2.6.22 you will effectively break those
systems. Not breakage in portage's eyes, but people upgrading their
systems won't be able to run the latest stable kernel with the latest
stable ati-drivers.

FYI, the patches in bug #183480 [1] allow one to use the most current
ati-drivers with a 2.6.22 kernel. As I am now while I am composing this
message. Having applied said patches and bumped ebuild locally. Just
needs to happen in tree :)

1. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=183480

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java

On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 16:55 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:31:09 -0400
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help
> > and no Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?
>
> There's an open-source driver for the r5xx stuff called the avivo
> driver [1].
>
> 1. http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=avivo/xf86-video-avivo.git;a=summary

Still leaves a gap, since the open source radeon driver is not fully
supporting R3xx to my knowledge much less r4xx.

--
William L. Thomson Jr.
Gentoo/Java

"William L. Thomson Jr." <wltjr@gentoo.org> posted
1186111148.32543.9.camel@wlt.obsidian-studios.com, excerpted below, on
Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:19:08 -0400:

> On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 16:55 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:31:09 -0400
>> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help
>> > and no Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?
>>
>> There's an open-source driver for the r5xx stuff called the avivo
>> driver [1].
>>
>> 1.
>> http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=avivo/xf86-video-avivo.git;a=summary
>
> Still leaves a gap, since the open source radeon driver is not fully
> supporting R3xx to my knowledge much less r4xx.

To the best of my knowledge... it's not stable upstream yet, but the
radeon driver now includes (reverse engineered) R3xx and I believe R4xx
support, including 3D. R5xx is right out, since even VESA has issues due
to the no 2D hardware engine at all.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 16:55 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> On Thu, 2 Aug 2007 19:31:09 -0400
>> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> if the driver blows dead goats and the vendor isnt willing to help
>>> and no Gentoo dev wants to touch it, what other solution is there ?
>> There's an open-source driver for the r5xx stuff called the avivo
>> driver [1].
>>
>> 1. http://gitweb.freedesktop.org/?p=avivo/xf86-video-avivo.git;a=summary
>
> Still leaves a gap, since the open source radeon driver is not fully
> supporting R3xx to my knowledge much less r4xx.

Update your knowledge, the normal radeon driver works nice for both. =)

Thanks,
Donnie

William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> FYI, the patches in bug #183480 [1] allow one to use the most current
> ati-drivers with a 2.6.22 kernel. As I am now while I am composing this
> message. Having applied said patches and bumped ebuild locally. Just
> needs to happen in tree :)

01 Aug 2007; Jeff Gardner <je_fro@gentoo.org>
+files/8.37.6/fix-ioctl-for-2.6.22.patch, ati-drivers-8.37.6-r1.ebuild:
Add patch to allow compilation with 2.6.22 kernels. See bug #182597.

Thanks,
Donnie

On Thursday 02 August 2007, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 20:05 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > sounds good to me ... so to tie back to the source of the thread, crappy
> > closed source vendor drivers are not a valid reason to hold up
> > stabilization of a kernel
>
> Who ever said they were crappy? Maybe the documentation on usage is
> crappy, but drivers have consistently gotten much better. These days
> pretty solid IMHO for my uses.

last time i used the drivers they sucked hard ... maybe it's gotten better; i
dont know -- i tossed all my ati in favor of nvidia

my point though wasnt to knock ati (although it was fun), the point was that i
do not believe any closed source driver in our tree should ever be grounds
for preventing stabilization of a kernel ebuild

so next time dsd (or whoever the ninja kernel maintainer happens to be at the
time) says "hey i plan on stabilizing Linux x.y.z" and someone goes "wait,
you cant until we get <closed source driver package foo> working", the reply
is of course "blow it out your arse^H^H^H^Htalk to the package maintainer,
this will not hold up stabilization efforts"
-mike

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> my point though wasnt to knock ati (although it was fun), the point was that i
> do not believe any closed source driver in our tree should ever be grounds
> for preventing stabilization of a kernel ebuild
>
> so next time dsd (or whoever the ninja kernel maintainer happens to be at the
> time) says "hey i plan on stabilizing Linux x.y.z" and someone goes "wait,
> you cant until we get <closed source driver package foo> working", the reply
> is of course "blow it out your arse^H^H^H^Htalk to the package maintainer,
> this will not hold up stabilization efforts"

If we're gonna go with this policy here, I'm also going to adopt it for
X so we don't get stuck in limbo as happened fairly recently.

Thanks,
Donnie