I have an ATI RADEON xprss 200M graphics card on a standard installation of FC5 64bit on an AMD turion 64bit laptop. I'm trying to use the ATI Driver Installer.

(to compile and make it specific to my system and therefore faster than installation by rpm)

However, I got this error. I did notice that the FAQ said that "32-Bit packages must be installed for 64Bit Linux drivers to install or work." Am I missing some packages or something? If so, which ones *specifically* do I need to download, and will they conflict with my existing x86_64 packages?
==================================================
Although I would prefer to use the installer, I did notice some rpms were available.

(on the page https://support.ati.com/ics/support/...ge&folderID=27 , then Linux Display Drivers and Software, then Linux x86_64 Notebooks with ATI Graphics, then ATI Proprietary Linux x86_64 Display Driver for XFree86 / X.Org Version 8.24.8 )

Now there was a XFree86 4.3 rpm and an X.Org 6.8. Does Fedora use XFree86 or Xorg, and which would I use (though as I said, I would prefer to use the installer above). What 32-bit packages do I need to install?


Thanks

You are better to use the driver you get from livna(?) via yum.
The ATI installer messes things up for you.
(Have you read the sticky - labelled nvidia, but actually about ati too - at the top of the fedora subforum?)

From the error, I would say that the 32 bit package creates the missing directory.
You need the i386 version of the packet you just tried to install.

The other possibility is that your x server is too new...

Thanks. A classic case of looking but not seeing, I suppose

However, I checked at livna, and they're only offering 2080 and 2096 kernel packages!

Where are the 2054 packages for those using the kernel that came as standard with Feodra Core 5? They're not anywhere on the internet! Do you know where I could get them? (I don't have the internet on my own PC, can't use yum)

You have no internet on your own PC because...?

Linux sans internet is tricky.
I had this problem - I solved it by finding an internet cafe which would allow me to bring my own box in and plug it into their network. I got broadband access that way at 4c/MB. (Even so, fully updating fedora (4 at the time) cost me about $30.) For a simple kernel upgrade, this should be much cheaper.

However - failing the desire to lug your box over the place:

Then you need a recent distro kernel from RedHat.
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu...pdates/5/i386/
kernel-2.6.16-1.2096_FC5.i686.rpm
kernel-devel-2.6.16-1.2096_FC5.i686.rpm

... install with the usual rpm commands. Not that I've even done it this way.

Thanks.

I just read somewhere that the 2054 kernel has a bug or something so that's why there's no graphics rpm for it.

Does mean I'm going to have to reinstall vmware though...
(sigh).

Is upgrading the kernel as easy as that? How is it possible to use a rpm to upgrade it while the kernel itself is still running?

I read on cnet that RH5 inadvertently breaks all proprietary drivers which link to the kernel.

There is a patch which "fixes" this.

(The move to prevent closed drivers linking to the kernels is not a new one - usually this is turned off ... though, I think, you'll find proprietary USB modules won't work.)

--- Editorial -----
There's something of a debate going on - specifically about video drivers - technically, any closed source module that links soft or hard) to the kernel violates the GPL (FSF). But Linus says that closed drivers which were developed for another operating system (merely ported over) don't count as far as he is concerned.

Since the drivers don't clearly violate anything until they are actually linked in - this would seem to be up to the individual user. While most people seem to be voting that they want these (at least when it comes to ATI/NVidia), I wonder how many understand the consequences of the choice.

This is temporary though - it appears that intel is working to produce open drivers for it's own chipsets - particularily with an aim at the graphics cards. We may even see a result this year.

ATI says they stay closed because their drivers involve IP that they do not own, only licence. Pretty much highlighting the cumulative evil of IP-software. OTOH: if they were to open the parts that they do own, and make clear where the third-party stuff is, then pressure would move from them and onto these other guys - so far lurking in the shadows.

nVidia say that developing graphics drivers is so difficult that it is beyond the open source community. Besides, their customers are not asking for open source drivers. The simple answer to each of these is: "How the [deleted] would you know?" For the latter - this is just not true: nvidia has been under constant pressure for open source drivers... and has even entered into industry partnerships to exploit some open initiatives like RedHat's AIGLX. As for the first - open programmers have shown themselves to be very bright indeed: the obvious test is to release the specs of the card and see how long their own team can stay ahead of the community. (There are obvious minuses int terms of hardware IP - but there are well known ways to deal with that.)

It is clear, however, that whoever produces open-source 3D cards first will have an undesputed market lead almost overnight. In the meantime, we struggle with the current top-dogs.

(BTW: I've had opportunity to test the nvidia installer under Ubuntu as well - and it does seem to mess that up too.)

more reading:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/securit...dows_vs_linux/
http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-b.../msg00965.html
--- end Editorial -----

... perhaps I should write articles?

So that's why then...

Thanks.

I also read that upgrading your kernel is fine as long as you use rpm -ivh and not rpm -Uvh

You can easily do rpm -Uvh, then your old kernel will be replaced by new one, you can do this if sure that u will not need old kernel anymore. And why do you need drivers on VMware mashine ? it is just virtual mashine .

No, it's a bit different for kernels, so I've just been reading. If you use rpm -Uvh , then it will try and upgrade your kernel (get rid of the old one and install the new one) while the old one is still running!

What's going to interpret your rpm command in the meantime while the old kernel has been deleted and the new one installed? Using -Uvh is not possible.

If you use -ivh, then when you next reboot your system, it will switch from the older kernel to the newer one. You can then do rpm -e of the old one if you wish.



I don't think I said anyhting about me running Fedora on VMware, just that I'd need to reinstall it seeing as the vmware will be dependent on the old kerne-devel package, adn I'll need to reinstall it so its dependent on the new one.

I have Windows on my VMware by the way. Fedora is installed on my hard drive.

You know, I'm using linux not for the first time, and upgraded my kernel using rpm -Uvh begining from Mandrake 10.0, till now - FC5 (before I was testing different distros).

Technically kernel looks somehow different: It loads only when you boot, "Uncompressing linux .............. done". And while u r in system, kernel is not needed, so you can easily upgrade to the one you like, even rebuild new one (yes, you can recompile your kernel for your needs ), or install another one via rpm -ivh. Just give a try!

Cheers

Here we are. From your words we can read: "I'm going to have to reinstall vmware though...". It seems, that your linux is running in virtual mashine, not in real.

If linux is in a virtual machine - that makes a difference. Or, maybe, linux is running the virtual machine?

Do you mean, that virtual mashine is more important than the linux system for him? Or he installed linux, just to use there vmware, and its pity that he should reinstall vmware?!

... except it could be linux running the VM, maybe with windows as the guest?

Sorry for being unclear: I was actually trying to support your observation while adding to it.

Since he's paid for it, he may as well. But it is always a pity when folk feel they must reject the more open alternatives. (OTOH: do I hear that MS now supports Xen?)

as fascinating a turn as this conversation has taken,
I do not have linux on my virtual machine!!!
I'm sure I can remember having said... oh here it is: Yes

I have Windows 98 on my virtual machine. My actual OS is Fedora. (but then that might change if a 64bit version of SUPER Suse ever gets released! But then nothing seems to be happening...)

The reason I need to re-install vmware is that when it compiled, it was dependent on the kernel-devel package of my current (old) kernel. Seeing as I'm going to uninstall my old kernel, and the kernel-devel package, I'm going to have to reinstall vmware so its dependent on the new kernel-devel package.

That sounds good. Are you sure though?

However, I don't think they'd ever port Windows 98 for Xen: far too old, so can't use Xen for that. (I had an old copy of Win 98 lying round, so I thought I'd install that on vmware instead of XP, as it'd be more responsive).

No... using the free trial. I'll buy it some day once I've been through college.

Interesting... I must have just been on a misleading website.
I'll give that a go.