Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 02:03:38PM -0400, Jim wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Roland Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the > > 2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is > > actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers > > with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?). > > Last I heard they got the documentation for card initialization and (I > think) power management. No acceleration docs yet. It still came to > over 900 pages. Hopefully there's been more since. Looking over the articles on the phoronix website it seems that accelleration on the R300 is supported, R5xx is shaping up and R6xx has just started but needs extra docs. The DRM driver in FreeBSD also needs updating, which is in the works, see other posts. > > The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the > > most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git > > repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well. > > ok, it looks like the radeon (no HD) driver is part of the > xf86-video-ati driver, and by the size of the ati_drv.so file, I'm > guessing most of what ati_drv.so does is access and control the access > of radeon_drv, correct? Not sure, but I guess so. > I wonder why there's no cutoff for the 3D functionality in the ATi > driver's man page. It just lists all supported cards without mention > of which have 3D implementations (try `man radeon`). It could be more clear. Maybe you can submit a bug report or a patch? But further down it says: Option "RenderAccel" "boolean" Enables or disables hardware Render acceleration. This driver does not support component alpha (subpixel) rendering. It is only supported on Radeon series up to and including 9200 (9500/9700 and newer unsupported). The default is to enable Render acceleration. For the record, my Radeon HD 3450 (RV620) works, but without accelleration at the moment. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpeagWiX6r5Q.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Roland Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the > 2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is > actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers > with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?). Last I heard they got the documentation for card initialization and (I think) power management. No acceleration docs yet. It still came to over 900 pages. Hopefully there's been more since. > The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the > most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git > repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well. ok, it looks like the radeon (no HD) driver is part of the xf86-video-ati driver, and by the size of the ati_drv.so file, I'm guessing most of what ati_drv.so does is access and control the access of radeon_drv, correct? I wonder why there's no cutoff for the 3D functionality in the ATi driver's man page. It just lists all supported cards without mention of which have 3D implementations (try `man radeon`). -Jim Stapleton ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:25:48PM -0700, Steve Franks wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Roland Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available > > in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this > > because it's easier just to install i386. > > > > Roland > > > > I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be > bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well? This has been discussed earlier on the list. To summarize (and correct me if I'm wrong, people) It should be possible to modify the ports infrastructure to support this, but nobody has volunteered to spend the effort to make it so, because it's much easier to install the i386 version. Very few people actually _need_ to run amd64 (because they regularly run out of address space on i386), especially on the desktop. > I guess you'd wind > up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being > re-installed as 32bit, right? Not completely. The X protocol works on 32 and 64 bit machines. But you would need a 32-bit Xlib (talking to a 64-bit X server). You can probably see that this would have significant consequences for the ports infrastructure; having to record both 32- and 64-bit packages, and the need to know which can work together. > I don't suppose there's any infrastructure for simultaneously > installing two versions of a port Not at the moment, I think. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgp5812AsthJy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
> Jail. I suspect I could build the base system plus X and copy > everything over to a jailed dir. Once there, I could set -m32 in the > CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS of the system make.conf. Build WINE in the jail, > add a /usr/local... bin32, lib32 and libexec32 to the main (non-jail) > part of the OS, and copy everything there. Then update the path and > libpath for my system... OK, not simple, but it'll be an interesting > experiment. I tried this a while ago with a chroot. I installed 7.0-RELEASE/i386 there, and built ports inside the chroot. You need to also do a few things to trick things like libtool (and other auto* tools) that your arch is i386 and not amd64. From memory, I think you need to: env UNAME_m=i386 make ... For what it's worth, I got wine (and all depends) built, but it did not work. It is likely I made a mistake along the way, of course. I believe the resulting binary was generating a SIGABRT. Naturally, if you have success doing this, it might be worth publishing the (excruciating) details. Regards, Josh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Steve Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be > bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well? I guess you'd wind > up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being > re-installed as 32bit, right? I don't suppose there's any > infrastructure for simultaneously installing two versions of a port > (one of the reasons BSD doesn't crash as much as win32, no doubt, and > that we don't usually have .dll/.so hell)...still I might settle for a > 32-bit X if I could have 64-bit disk & network still... > > Steve > Jail. I suspect I could build the base system plus X and copy everything over to a jailed dir. Once there, I could set -m32 in the CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS of the system make.conf. Build WINE in the jail, add a /usr/local... bin32, lib32 and libexec32 to the main (non-jail) part of the OS, and copy everything there. Then update the path and libpath for my system... OK, not simple, but it'll be an interesting experiment. *Jeremy Clarkson* What could /possibly/ go wrong? Not really had the issues you mentioned in Windows in the last few years, but I still prefer FreeBSD - the KDE and Gnome user interfaces (desktop management) are just much more efficient for getting work done (for me anyway) than that of Windows, and I can have a lot more control over my system. -Jim Stapleton ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:17:23PM -0400, Jim wrote: > Has anyone had much experience with a 3600 series ATi card, it's the > best in the discreet-video category for my target price/performance, > but not listed in the man pages for the Radeon (non-HD) - only the > 3400s and the 3800s). Aside from that, going for the really cheap end, > has anyone had much experience with the Intel 4500HD chipsets yet? I'm > lousy with other people's code (barely good with my own), but I could > test if needed, if/when I get the board. The last ATI chip with full open-source 3D accelleration support is the 2950 (RV280), but 3D and accelleration support for newer chips is actively being worked on. ATI is even going to provide the developers with documentation (could be that that has happened by now?). The most up-to-date info can usually be found on the phoronix.com website, e.g. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjU0OQ The driver that you want for ATI cards is xf86-video-ati. But for the most features you'll have to compile it yourself from the code in a git repository. You'll probably need an updated DRM driver as well. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgphp9gmT0T6h.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:16 PM, Roland Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 02:20:45PM -0400, Jim wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: >> >> At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want >> >> three things. >> >> >> >> 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - >> >> it's mostly a multimedia machine >> >> decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few >> >> games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS >> >> doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be >> >> better). >> >> FreeBSD. >> > >> > You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only: >> > >> > %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile >> > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386 >> > >> >> I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS >> and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine. > > IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available > in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this > because it's easier just to install i386. > > Roland > -- > R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ > [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] > pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) > I suppose it's naive to think that some tool like portupgrade could be bent to build all the depends with -m32 as well? I guess you'd wind up with a bunch of things you didn't want as 32-bit (i.e. XOrg?) being re-installed as 32bit, right? I don't suppose there's any infrastructure for simultaneously installing two versions of a port (one of the reasons BSD doesn't crash as much as win32, no doubt, and that we don't usually have .dll/.so hell)...still I might settle for a 32-bit X if I could have 64-bit disk & network still... Steve ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 02:20:45PM -0400, Jim wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: > >> At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want > >> three things. > >> > >> 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - > >> it's mostly a multimedia machine > >> decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few > >> games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS > >> doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be > >> better). > >> FreeBSD. > > > > You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only: > > > > %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile > > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386 > > > > I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS > and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine. IIRC, all the libraries that WINE depends on also need to be available in 32 bits. While not impossible nobody has spent any affort on this because it's easier just to install i386. Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpkQrLKbN4JI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: > >> At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want > >> three things. > >> > >> 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - > >> it's mostly a multimedia machine > >> decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few > >> games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS > >> doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be > >> better). > >> FreeBSD. > > > > You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only: > > > > %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile > > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386 > > I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS > and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine. You may already know more than I do then; I haven't tried that and my main desktop is currently running i386. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 2:06 PM, John Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: >> At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want >> three things. >> >> 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - >> it's mostly a multimedia machine >> decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few >> games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS >> doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be >> better). >> FreeBSD. > > You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only: > > %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile > ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386 > I was under the impression you could build it with -m32 set in CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS and it worked fine. Thanks, -Jim Stapleton ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: ATi & Intel graphics
On Wednesday 13 August 2008, Jim wrote: > At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want > three things. > > 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - > it's mostly a multimedia machine > decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few > games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS > doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be > better). > FreeBSD. You may want to rethink this. The emulators/wine port is i386-only: %grep -i arch /usr/ports/emulators/wine/Makefile ONLY_FOR_ARCHS= i386 > I've used Solaris and Linux, and honestly, I'd rather go back to > Windows and use Cygwin for my *nix needs. > I'd rather use FreeBSD for the system than Windows. > > 64 Bit immediately knocks out the thoughts on using an nVidia card. > > Has anyone had much experience with a 3600 series ATi card, it's the > best in the discreet-video category for my target price/performance, > but not listed in the man pages for the Radeon (non-HD) - only the > 3400s and the 3800s). Aside from that, going for the really cheap end, > has anyone had much experience with the Intel 4500HD chipsets yet? I'm > lousy with other people's code (barely good with my own), but I could > test if needed, if/when I get the board. In my experience the Intel and Radeon drivers for Xorg work very well on FreeBSD, but I don't have experience with any of the specific hardware you mention. > Could anyone give me some of their experiences here? How are your > experiences with these pieces of hardware and their drivers in terms > of stability/reliability (in FreeBSD of course)? Are either of these > setups in a place where a tester would be needed/welcome? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
ATi & Intel graphics
At some point fairly soon, I'll be rebuilding my computer, and I want three things. 64 Bit for more memory, maybe a bit of performance boost as well - it's mostly a multimedia machine decent/good 3D acceleration (better than a GeForce 7300GS - a few games in WINE in 1920x1080 - yes, believe it or not, the 7300GS doesn't do /bad/ on many of the games, but it certainly could be better). FreeBSD. I've used Solaris and Linux, and honestly, I'd rather go back to Windows and use Cygwin for my *nix needs. I'd rather use FreeBSD for the system than Windows. 64 Bit immediately knocks out the thoughts on using an nVidia card. Has anyone had much experience with a 3600 series ATi card, it's the best in the discreet-video category for my target price/performance, but not listed in the man pages for the Radeon (non-HD) - only the 3400s and the 3800s). Aside from that, going for the really cheap end, has anyone had much experience with the Intel 4500HD chipsets yet? I'm lousy with other people's code (barely good with my own), but I could test if needed, if/when I get the board. Could anyone give me some of their experiences here? How are your experiences with these pieces of hardware and their drivers in terms of stability/reliability (in FreeBSD of course)? Are either of these setups in a place where a tester would be needed/welcome? Thanks, -Jim Stapleton ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
