User talk:67.239.165.48: Difference between revisions
From cchtml.com
Super Jamie (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
** That's me, check the history. I actually like your idea of presenting two driver options and I've written a more impartial overview of each driver. I see you're still editing so I'll wait till you're done to apply it. I also disagree with some things you've stated: The broken module compilation is fixed with a two-line sourcecode comment, we should include the fix rather that just say "it's busted", I'm using fglrx on 3.2.9-2 fine. I'm also completely removing your dracut step, this is far too complex for a regular user who doesn't understand initramfs, it also leaves the system in a state where it may not actually have a graphics driver if fglrx stuffs up. Blacklisting on the kernel line is sufficient and is what the RPMFusion RPM scripts and the Official installation script do anyway. --[[User:Super Jamie|Super Jamie]] 06:02, 22 March 2012 (CDT) | ** That's me, check the history. I actually like your idea of presenting two driver options and I've written a more impartial overview of each driver. I see you're still editing so I'll wait till you're done to apply it. I also disagree with some things you've stated: The broken module compilation is fixed with a two-line sourcecode comment, we should include the fix rather that just say "it's busted", I'm using fglrx on 3.2.9-2 fine. I'm also completely removing your dracut step, this is far too complex for a regular user who doesn't understand initramfs, it also leaves the system in a state where it may not actually have a graphics driver if fglrx stuffs up. Blacklisting on the kernel line is sufficient and is what the RPMFusion RPM scripts and the Official installation script do anyway. --[[User:Super Jamie|Super Jamie]] 06:02, 22 March 2012 (CDT) | ||
** Changes made. Feel free to contact me via the email address on my userpage if you'd like to discuss directly, here is fine too. --[[User:Super Jamie|Super Jamie]] 06:48, 22 March 2012 (CDT) | ** Changes made. Feel free to contact me via the email address on my userpage if you'd like to discuss directly, here is fine too. --[[User:Super Jamie|Super Jamie]] 06:48, 22 March 2012 (CDT) | ||
Ok, I see. It's nice to put a name to the text. As far as the 3.2.9-1 fix goes, I assumed you would have gleaned that there was no other solution afaik. But I am glad there is a solution and that it's being published. I personally tested it last night and it works on 64 bit Fedora; however there seems to be a problem getting the method to work on 32 bit. | |||
Revision as of 14:12, 23 March 2012
- I don't know who's editing the Fedora 16 Fglrx page, but the first paragraph titled "Please Consider" was originally written evidently to push a particular license (GPL) rather than present procedures and solutions. I've edited that to make it somewhat neutral but someone seems intent on pushing radeon first. Besides the fact that radeon is already the default installed driver on most distros, there isn't really a need to mention radeon at all other than to state that it exists, since a procedure is generally not needed for radeon installation. That makes a radeon driver discussion redundant unless you are pushing GPL. IMO this site should not be used for pimping licenses but rather for presenting solutions.
- That's me, check the history. I actually like your idea of presenting two driver options and I've written a more impartial overview of each driver. I see you're still editing so I'll wait till you're done to apply it. I also disagree with some things you've stated: The broken module compilation is fixed with a two-line sourcecode comment, we should include the fix rather that just say "it's busted", I'm using fglrx on 3.2.9-2 fine. I'm also completely removing your dracut step, this is far too complex for a regular user who doesn't understand initramfs, it also leaves the system in a state where it may not actually have a graphics driver if fglrx stuffs up. Blacklisting on the kernel line is sufficient and is what the RPMFusion RPM scripts and the Official installation script do anyway. --Super Jamie 06:02, 22 March 2012 (CDT)
- Changes made. Feel free to contact me via the email address on my userpage if you'd like to discuss directly, here is fine too. --Super Jamie 06:48, 22 March 2012 (CDT)
Ok, I see. It's nice to put a name to the text. As far as the 3.2.9-1 fix goes, I assumed you would have gleaned that there was no other solution afaik. But I am glad there is a solution and that it's being published. I personally tested it last night and it works on 64 bit Fedora; however there seems to be a problem getting the method to work on 32 bit.
