On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 19:01 +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 12:49 -0500, Adam K Kirchhoff wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 15:42 +0100, Michel Dänzer wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 09:26 -0500, Adam K Kirchhoff wrote: > > > > > > > > > The log file on FreeBSD doesn't show the same warning as the log file on > > > > linux about the support being experimental. > > > > > > > > Hmmm... FreeBSD shows: > > > > > > > > (II) RADEON(0): [drm] DRM interface version 1.2 > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > And linux shows: > > > > > > > > (II) RADEON(0): [drm] DRM interface version 1.3 > > > > > > So it looks like you're using a newer DRM on Linux but a newer > > > xf86-video-ati on FreeBSD. Does making either of these equal between OSs > > > change anything? > > > > > > > > > > Well, the DRM module itself is the same version as under linux (1.25.0). > > Are you referring to libdrm? > > No, see the different DRM interface versions (corresponding to the 'drm' > kernel module) above. Maybe they're just different between OSs though. > >
Yeah, I think that must be the case. I pulled the latest drm from the git repo and built both a newer libdrm and a newer drm.ko and radeon.ko kernel modules. I get the same results (and the same output in the Xorg log file about the interface version). I've also updated the xf86-video-ati driver on the linux installation to 6.6.3, so it's now the same version as the FreeBSD driver. DRI still works fine on the linux installation. Any other ideas? :-) Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
