Difference between revisions of "Talk:Fedora Core 4 Installation Guide"

From cchtml.com
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by 194.9.85.141 (Talk); changed back to last version by EoD)
Line 1: Line 1:
racvarlad
 
 
The livna.org package is a 3rd party installer. If the person feels it is worthy enough, why don't they work with ATI to create a better installer for all of us? I do not feel that it should stay at the top because it is from a 3rd party. The true source of the driver (ATI.com) needs to be shown before hand. "Security by obscurity" doesn't work, what makes you think "download by obscurity" will?
 
The livna.org package is a 3rd party installer. If the person feels it is worthy enough, why don't they work with ATI to create a better installer for all of us? I do not feel that it should stay at the top because it is from a 3rd party. The true source of the driver (ATI.com) needs to be shown before hand. "Security by obscurity" doesn't work, what makes you think "download by obscurity" will?
  

Revision as of 17:18, 29 September 2007

The livna.org package is a 3rd party installer. If the person feels it is worthy enough, why don't they work with ATI to create a better installer for all of us? I do not feel that it should stay at the top because it is from a 3rd party. The true source of the driver (ATI.com) needs to be shown before hand. "Security by obscurity" doesn't work, what makes you think "download by obscurity" will?

For me, the ATI script installer is the easiest and has worked every time. My xorg.conf file is a default file (no ATI configuration what-so-ever in the DEVICE field). With aticonfig... the livna package is dated and not really needed.


This is assuming that the ati installer works. It's obvious you don't use a 64 bit distro with a 2.6.16 or newer kernel as the installer simply does not compile the kernel module for those kernels. ATI hasn't fixed this for at least the last 2 driver releases as well as there being kernel module compiling issues on previous kernels.