Summary: | x11-drivers/ati-drivers fail to build against 2.6.25-r1 kernel | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | John Doe <orodruinlair> |
Component: | [OLD] Unspecified | Assignee: | Luca Barbato <lu_zero> |
Status: | RESOLVED UPSTREAM | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | grimm, je_fro, maggu2810, marv3fan, michael.schulz.mail, paluszak, rose, Sergiy.Borodych, sgtphou, thiago.berne, ylvisaki |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | x86 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 218127 | ||
Attachments: | working patch |
Description
John Doe
2008-04-19 14:46:35 UTC
Hope you're ready to help fixing the drivers :) the cap stuff is easy to fix, the tlb and memory management stuff got unexposed and require upstream to take care. Luca, any chance you could add a kernel version check to the ebuild so that it deliberately bails out on 2.6.25? Or if it works on some configurations, perhaps just an ewarn would be useful. Thanks. applying the two patches found on google for this problem, and then altering the kernel sources via the method in the Gentoo ATI Drivers HOWTO page will make this compile correctly. I do not know if this can be accommodated via portage as it would require patches for both the kernel and the drivers. Created attachment 150533 [details, diff]
working patch
The attached file is the patch to fix the original problem the compilation fails with, and then the process listed at http://gentoo-wiki.com/Ati#Build_ati-drivers_on_rt-kernels_failed will fix the subsequent problem. Woah, that page suggests to remove GPL-only annotations! That's bloody illegal. Greg KH would probably kill you with his own hands for that. i don't know about the legality of it, as i'm strictly an end-user. all i know is it works. Oh yeah, I forgot that the GPL and copyright law doesn't apply to end users. For the record, I would just like to point out that a dependency conflict now exists between x11-drivers/ati-drivers and sys-kernel/gentoo-sources or sys-kernel/vanilla-sources - both kernel ebuilds have now got 2.5.25 releases tagged as stable (at least on x86 and amd64). Given that the problem seems to have already been resolved in more recent upstream packages, it seems a good idea to resolve this conflict by selecting one of such more recent packages and marking it as stable. I agree. It would be nice having my X server running without any hack... (In reply to comment #10) > For the record, I would just like to point out that a dependency conflict now > exists between x11-drivers/ati-drivers and sys-kernel/gentoo-sources or > sys-kernel/vanilla-sources - both kernel ebuilds have now got 2.5.25 releases > tagged as stable (at least on x86 and amd64). Given that the problem seems to > have already been resolved in more recent upstream packages, it seems a good > idea to resolve this conflict by selecting one of such more recent packages and > marking it as stable. > |