ATI Radeon & Fedora Core 3
 

Has ANYONE got the new ATI drivers [fglrx-4.3.0-3.14.6.i386.rpm] to work with Fedora Core 3 at all?

FC3 came out a couple of days ago so I'm using a fresh install with the original version of X11 [xorg-x11-6.8.1-12] as well as the ATI drivers that have just come out.

Linux 2.6.9-1.667 including source
Pentium 3 ~500Mhz
512MB RAM
ATI Radeon 9200

I found some postings for the ATI drivers with FC2 and have run into similar problems. I was able to install the drivers via rpm, which required using --force to overwrite some Mesa files. That went fine but gave me the complaints that it was for a diferent version of XFree86 (which is of course x.org but that shouldn't seem to matter according to most posts). Said I could do 2D but not 3D without building some kernel modules. fglrxinfo reveals that the Mesa libs are still being used. I pulled down some patches to apply before building the modules [according to the posts] but these were for FC2. I got some errors when trying to apply the patches and of course then couldn't 'make' the modules.

I salveged this machine from the dumpster, ripped out the p2 and put in an early p3 I had, some more memory, OC'd it to think it's 500Mhz, but purchased the video card, as 9200 was supposed to be decent low end for short money. So This system probably won't handle Doom3, but I've played Quake3 on it and it's more than adequate.

Considering that Fedora is a good percentage of all [gaming/desktop] linux distributions and this problem hasn't changed since FC2, all I can say to ATI is WHAT THE FCUK?! These drivers just came out and their install routine is still broken & incomplete. Linux users are more technically savvy than win666 users but that doesn't mean we are all graphics programmers or hardware engineers. They need to provide tested working install documentation for common scenarios.

Okay, sorry for the long rant. If anyone has had actual [not theoretical] success with this, they would be doing me and many others to come an enormous service if they could post a complete and detailed description of what they have and what they did (ie: "typed 'ls [Enter]'")

May Santa fill your stockings with all the right sized hard drive screws. I remain &c.

M. Peter Holm.

I ran into a similar problem when I installed SuSE 9.1 when it was new. ATI is so far behind with their Linux support it's not funny. I had to wait until they released their most recent version of the drivers which actually supported the version of XFree86 that I have (4.3.99). However, I believe I read that FC3 has a newer version than that. Sorry to say with an ATI card you will probably either have to wait or become an engineer or some sort.

Yeah. I WAS an engineer. My job went to India and I've since changed feilds. I wonder if ATI's engineers are in India too..

Are you sure that the driver will work with X.org?

driver:
http://www.ati.com/support/drivers/l...8&submit=GO%21
FAQ:
http://www.ati.com/products/catalyst/linux.html#7
Installation:
http://www.ati.com/support/infobase/linuxhowto-ati.html

None of those mention X.org, and it also says that currently the 2.4 kernel is supported; support for 2.6 is under development. My *suggestion* would be to stick with XFree86 4.3, and try it then.

I realize the document calls for XF86 and linux 2.4. As I understand it the differnce between XF86 and X.org is the name and the license,. which is why RH moved to X.org. Some people claimed to have gotten it working under FC2 which is why I asked anyone who HAS gotten it to work with FC3 to post the details.

As far as their supporting only 2.4, I have to go back to my original rant. ATI just released this driver a few days ago (as an rpm no less) and it's supposed to be for what, RH8??.. I just feel like 2.4 is done. Come on peeps. This web server runs 2.6. Even their example in ATI Howto is Mandrake 10 with the 2.6 kernel! ATI is condecending linux users by giving the bare minimum in 'support' of one possible linux configuration, just so they can put 'linux supported' on the box. Do you know what you can (/ATI probably is) hire programmers for in India today$? Your ATI,. 1/2 of the gpus out there! Just code up a freakin 2.6 driver for your own hardware already.

whew.

PS Not trying to knock India. It's a beautiful country, I've been twice. Tech shops there are simply responding to market demand like anyone would, including another densly populated nation I'm familiar with. Eastern Europe is currently providing more programmers than you can shake a perogi at for ~ $5 - $10 / hr.

I had FC 2 working with ATI...
 

..but now in FC3 we need the kernel-source which I understand is no longer in .rpm format. You have to rebuild it from src.rpm. I am not familiar with that.

I did have FC2 and the ATI drivers working nicely...too bad I upgraded to FC3. :-)
Just have to wait for someone more technically saavy than I to come along and create a patch.

I don't understand the new kernel source method either, but I'm sure it's not difficult. There is a .src.rpm, so it must just include another step to 'build' the source?.. So assuming we can get the source in there, how did you get it working?

i commit my experience to the net in the hopes that someone will come up with a solution that actually works. i got the kernel module built, but it's not stable. first, here's what i did:

1) install the kernel source rpm. there are instructions in the fc3 release notes here:

http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pu...-NOTES-en.html

(it took me a bit of searching to find that you can substitute the output of "uname -p" for <arch>)

2) make a link to the source in /usr/src. mine looks like this:

/usr/src/linux -> /usr/src/redhat/BUILD/kernel-2.6.9/linux-2.6.9/

3) comment-out one line of make.sh so that it looks like this:

# just comment this line out if you already set an alternative location
# linuxincludes=/lib/modules/${uname_r}/build/include

4) add an extra line to 2.6.6/Makefile so that it looks like this:

-Idrivers/char/drm/ \
-I/usr/src/linux/drivers/char/drm/ \

(add the second line)

now pray to whatever deities you believe in and sh make.sh.

my machine locked up the first time i tried the driver. then i disabled glx and... well, it's been stable long enough for me to watch the daily show with hw scaling and type this message. that's the extent of my fiddling, hope someone else can get it really working.

i've probably left something out, but i'm pretty sick of wasting time screwing around with ati's drivers every time they release a new version that *still* doesn't support their hdtv dongle. no more ati cards for me.

How I got it to work under FC2
 

I found a way to use the 4.3.0-3.9.0 driver from ATI.

I was getting an error the "count" was not recognized during the sh
make.sh portion of the install.

I went into the files as indicated by the error (one being the
firegl_public.c file) and changed the instance of "count" to "_count".
That did the trick. There was two files that needed this tweak. Both are
in the 2.6.x folder.

i am running FC2 Kernel 2.6.6-1.406 on a Dell Latitude D800 with
modified ATI 9600 from Dell inspiron 8600 laptop.

ATI's drivers at this point of time do not support x.org 6.8.0 or higher. They currently have promised that support will be added in the next driver update, scheduled to be released sometime in December.

I had no problem at all installing Fedora Core 3 on my test machine. I didn't bother with the ATI driver because the X Windows System detect picked the driver for the ATI 9200 and the X Window System came right up to the login screen when the install was complate. The picture is sharp and crisp with no bleeding of colors or fuzzyness around the edges. And the X Windows System resolutions all worked with the monitor I have.

My specs....
Fedora Core 3 - kernel 2.6.9-1.667 (workstation install)
DFI NFII Ultra AL Motherboard
Athlon XP3000+ *Barton Core* 333FSB CPU
Ultra 512MB DDR 400FSB RAM
ATI Radeon 9200 128MB 8x AGP

Question: What prompted the interest in the ATI driver over what the driver base in the X Window System that comes with Fedora Core 3 already has?

The driver that comes with X.org works great for 2D applications and general use, but if you want to play games or make any use of the advanced 3D rendering capabilities of the hardware you really need to get the ATI drivers working.

I really want to play me some Tux Racer. :) Gotta get more Herring.

hi, i read this (partically.. at least the first few posts) and i was reading that ati's drivers don't work with x.org version of x-windows.. well i had mandrake 10.1 that used x.org x-windows and it didn't let me startx after i installed it .. so after a bit of playing around (yes a 'bit' .. heh more like 3 - 8 hours).. i figured it out and was able to get 2D/3D rendering support. I have an 9600 radeon btw. Umm.. what i did was i fiddled around with the way that the fglxrconfig program saves the XFree86-4 config file .. and somehow made that into the x.org config file that was being used on x.org of course. Well i just installed Fedora Core 3 tonight and i couldn't use ATi's check.sh to see what version of xfree i have :P.. and i was just gonna double check if the drivers work for FC3 and well i came across this and by the sounds of it.. if i just get the kernel-source for FC3 and install the drivers i'll probably run into that same error then i'll just fix it the way i did b4. i forget why i was posting this again.. lol oh just to say that if u fiddle around with the XFree86-4 config file and the x.org config file that is being used by x.org x-windows.. then u should eventually be able to get x.org working.. although i didn't read the whole thread and theres probably a solution already.. but just another voice in the matter helps sometimes i guess. good luck.

??

my thoughts exactly.

all that stuff sounds like the best option would be to wait for x.org, ati and fedora to catch up with the current tech.

i wish they would post tidbits on the fedora website under like HCL would be nice! :scratch: