SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware 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.
I have a screen resolution stuck at 1024x768 at 61Hz so I downloaded the latest driver for my ATI card and followed the installation instructions. I run the installer and then run as per the installation instructions and got the following response...
Does anyone know how to install and run the ati driver for Slackware....Checked the threads and there are so many conflicting views on this...how did you get yours to work. Why is everything so damn awkward in Slackware. Mandriva and Suse never had any problems with recognizing ati drivers. I was told Slackware was the bees-knees - sorry but up until now I dont think so.
I can seriously see a re-install of mandriva coming on.
cwwilson721 contributed this guide some time ago. It a generic guide for setting up 3D accel on several card models including ATI's
Hope it helps somehow, I can't help ya with ATI stuff. I'm a nVidia lover for some time now
Still looking for a solution to this so if anyone has any ideas then any input would be greatfully recieved. Someone who has got their ati graphics up to speed on an older machine.
raska...think the post is rather out dated fglrxconfig doesnot exist after make-install. Thanks anyways.
Surely there must be someone out there who is running a slightly older PC with an ATI card that has successfully installed the ATI driver tool...
Or am I the only one with an ATI card...
From the ATI website there are three different driver downloads for linux...I have tried all three.
The instructions above are not current as is shilo's instructions from the great "how I did it all post". The command flgrxconfig is no longer an option, it doesnot exist.
There are mixed posts about configuring some X configuration files. I have also tried from the command line after stopping X. I am at the end of the line here and banging my head of a brick wall.
the driver how to that i wrote that's on the link that raska gave you works for slack 10.2
now, if you have a radeon 9500 or less than no you wont get dri with ATI's drivers and you have to go and use the xorg driver, that is per ATI's direction not mine.
post any qeustioons here you got and i try and help you too
Sorry OldFoggie but I dont know the history of ATI cards. My card according to lspci is an ATI Rage 128 and is this before or after radeon 9500. Excuse my ignorance of hardware technicalities.
What if I enable DRI, or re configure X as suggested somewhere else in the forum.
That should help you get your Rage 128 working in Xorg. (Specifically Chapter 5, where all you have to do is edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf and change what is needed to be changed)
If you need any more specific help, then post again.
FWIW I think it's a shame that ATI does not go back that far. Quite simply that is a video card that you can still buy at a retail store where I live, and by all rights they really should be covering it.
followed the link and edited the file as suggested..restarted x and it failed saying something like undefined reference to "VESA Framebuffer". Maybe I didn't edit the correct line or there is another reference to "VESA Framebuffer" that needs to be modified.
Here is the wording from the link above...
Quote:
The driver auto-detects all device information necessary to initialize the card. The only lines you need in the "Device" section of your xorg.conf file are:
However, if you have problems with auto-detection, you can specify:
* VideoRam - in kilobytes
* MemBase - physical address of the linear framebuffer
* IOBase - physical address of the memory mapped IO registers
* ChipID - PCI DEVICE ID
The section of xorg.conf relevant to the display and monitor after added above...
# HorizSync is in kHz unless units are specified.
# HorizSync may be a comma separated list of discrete values, or a
# comma separated list of ranges of values.
# NOTE: THE VALUES HERE ARE EXAMPLES ONLY. REFER TO YOUR MONITOR'S
# USER MANUAL FOR THE CORRECT NUMBERS.
# VertRefresh is in Hz unless units are specified.
# VertRefresh may be a comma separated list of discrete values, or a
# comma separated list of ranges of values.
# NOTE: THE VALUES HERE ARE EXAMPLES ONLY. REFER TO YOUR MONITOR'S
# USER MANUAL FOR THE CORRECT NUMBERS.
# Any number of screen sections may be present. Each describes
# the configuration of a single screen. A single specific screen section
# may be specified from the X server command line with the "-screen"
# option.
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen 1"
Device "VESA Framebuffer"
Monitor "My Monitor"
# If your card can handle it, a higher default color depth (like 24 or 32)
# is highly recommended.
# "1024x768" is also a conservative usable default resolution. If you
# have a better monitor, feel free to try resolutions such as
# "1152x864", "1280x1024", "1600x1200", and "1800x1400" (or whatever your
# card/monitor can produce)
# HorizSync is in kHz unless units are specified.
# HorizSync may be a comma separated list of discrete values, or a
# comma separated list of ranges of values.
# NOTE: THE VALUES HERE ARE EXAMPLES ONLY. REFER TO YOUR MONITOR'S
# USER MANUAL FOR THE CORRECT NUMBERS.
# VertRefresh is in Hz unless units are specified.
# VertRefresh may be a comma separated list of discrete values, or a
# comma separated list of ranges of values.
# NOTE: THE VALUES HERE ARE EXAMPLES ONLY. REFER TO YOUR MONITOR'S
# USER MANUAL FOR THE CORRECT NUMBERS.
# Any number of screen sections may be present. Each describes
# the configuration of a single screen. A single specific screen section
# may be specified from the X server command line with the "-screen"
# option.
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen 1"
Device "VESA Framebuffer"
Monitor "My Monitor"
# If your card can handle it, a higher default color depth (like 24 or 32)
# is highly recommended.
# "1024x768" is also a conservative usable default resolution. If you
# have a better monitor, feel free to try resolutions such as
# "1152x864", "1280x1024", "1600x1200", and "1800x1400" (or whatever your
# card/monitor can produce)
FWIW I think it's a shame that ATI does not go back that far. Quite simply that is a video card that you can still buy at a retail store where I live, and by all rights they really should be covering it.
Well, ATI doesn't NEED to go back that far. Every ATI video card before(and including) the Radeon 9200 is perfectly supported by the opensource drivers inside xfree/xorg.(including the rage 128)
It's the videocards AFTER the 9200 that need the ATI driver, and that's all that the ATI driver supports.
....the Radeon 9200 is perfectly supported by the opensource drivers....
I had one of those cards, like a year ago. I remember that the VESA driver used to give me more frames on glxgears than the supposed-to-work driver "radeon" LOL
Thanks to the destiny I got rid of that card
okay I have edited xorg.conf but I am still restricted to 1024x768 at 61Hz is there any further editing that can be done to get a higher screen resolution than above, say 1152x864 for example.
Any input would be greatfully appreciated...I tried adding 1152x864 to the file at the sub sections display but this had no effect in adding that option to the display choices.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.