Linux - HardwareThis forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Greets all. I've recently wiped my laptop clean, installed Slackware, then wiped the kernel and built the current stable kernel from kernel.org; 2.6.21.5
I ran the ATI driver installer for the Radeon Xpress200M direct from ATI, and no matter what I do I still get 'MESA' from fgrlxinfo. Is it possible i've compiled something into the kernel (built in, rather than as a module) that is not allowing the ATI installer to install and/or use the module it wants to install? Perhaps I should take something or somethings out but I don't know what..perhaps kernel level DRI, or building (not modularizing) kernel level support for "Radeon" chipset? Any suggestions are extremely appreciated. Thanks guys!
Distribution: RHEL/CentOS/SL 5 i386 and x86_64 pata for IDE in use
Posts: 4,790
Rep:
Compare your kernel config file Graphics support section to this;
Code:
#
# Graphics support
#
# CONFIG_FIRMWARE_EDID is not set
CONFIG_FB=y
CONFIG_FB_DDC=m
CONFIG_FB_CFB_FILLRECT=y
CONFIG_FB_CFB_COPYAREA=y
CONFIG_FB_CFB_IMAGEBLIT=y
# CONFIG_FB_MACMODES is not set
# CONFIG_FB_BACKLIGHT is not set
CONFIG_FB_MODE_HELPERS=y
# CONFIG_FB_TILEBLITTING is not set
# CONFIG_FB_CIRRUS is not set
# CONFIG_FB_PM2 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_CYBER2000 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ARC is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ASILIANT is not set
# CONFIG_FB_IMSTT is not set
# CONFIG_FB_VGA16 is not set
CONFIG_FB_VESA=y
# CONFIG_FB_HGA is not set
# CONFIG_FB_S1D13XXX is not set
# CONFIG_FB_NVIDIA is not set
# CONFIG_FB_RIVA is not set
# CONFIG_FB_INTEL is not set
# CONFIG_FB_MATROX is not set
CONFIG_FB_RADEON=m
CONFIG_FB_RADEON_I2C=y
# CONFIG_FB_RADEON_DEBUG is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ATY128 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_ATY is not set
# CONFIG_FB_SAVAGE is not set
# CONFIG_FB_SIS is not set
# CONFIG_FB_NEOMAGIC is not set
# CONFIG_FB_KYRO is not set
# CONFIG_FB_3DFX is not set
# CONFIG_FB_VOODOO1 is not set
# CONFIG_FB_TRIDENT is not set
# CONFIG_FB_GEODE is not set
# CONFIG_FB_VIRTUAL is not set
#
# Console display driver support
#
CONFIG_VGA_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_VGACON_SOFT_SCROLLBACK is not set
CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y
CONFIG_DUMMY_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_FRAMEBUFFER_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_FRAMEBUFFER_CONSOLE_ROTATION is not set
# CONFIG_FONTS is not set
CONFIG_FONT_8x8=y
CONFIG_FONT_8x16=y
#
# Logo configuration
#
CONFIG_LOGO=y
# CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_MONO is not set
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_VGA16=y
CONFIG_LOGO_LINUX_CLUT224=y
CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_LCD_SUPPORT=y
CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE=y
CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_DEVICE=y
CONFIG_LCD_CLASS_DEVICE=m
CONFIG_LCD_DEVICE=y
Also compare your xorg.conf file to this example below;
Well, no success there. I made sure my .config matched the appropiate parameters of yours, and I made sure the stuff in my xorg.conf read the same as what you had posted. I've played with it, and no success. I still read "Mesa". I also before replying tried running the ati installer once for laughs...didn't do anything.
Distribution: Fedora, Gentoo, Debian, Slackware, IRIX, OS X
Posts: 192
Rep:
Just a thought, but I remember reading somewhere that the fglrx driver and kernels >= 2.6.20 don't get a long. But there again, I've only tested fglrx on 2.4.x and 2.6.15 >= x >= 2.6.18
Distribution: RHEL/CentOS/SL 5 i386 and x86_64 pata for IDE in use
Posts: 4,790
Rep:
Yes they do;
$ uname -a
Linux Aspire5100 2.6.20.14 #3 SMP Thu Jun 14 12:41:34 EDT 2007 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$ fglrxinfo
display: :0.0 screen: 0
OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc.
OpenGL renderer string: ATI Radeon Xpress Series
OpenGL version string: 2.0.6458 (8.36.5)
I've read over many many searches that people have had problems over the past couple years with ATI's drivers and spakin' new kernels. I used to have 3d accel. working fine back when I was running 2.6.18. I had so much crapola in my home directory I elected to just wipe my HD clean, do a fresh install and rebuild the latest stable.
Seems I'll most likely have to stick with 2.6.21.5 for a while, and wait till the new drivers come out. Bet it'll work then. Still, the sum of all my woes throughout my history with linux has proved over and over again; ATI (as far as those who use linux exclusively are concerned) sucks. And avoid the Radeon Xpress 200M at all costs, it's a steamin' pile o' sh*t
Patience is a virtue. I don't need 3d accel. bad enough to downgrade. But thanks for taking the time to help me.
--crasslogic
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.