Apr 8, 2011 12:03:05 PM, test@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
The reason this is a fallacy is that you haven't established that the level of OpenGL support is the *only* difference between the configurations in question, and it certainly isn't. There are all sorts of others. As Ajax says, it's likely not to do with the exact level of OpenGL support available, it's more likely just a bug in the problematic hardware / driver combo. -- Adam Williamson
This hardware appears to be a write-off for Gnome3 now (see the comment by Owen Taylor at the BZ below), but I'll still point out something interesting I saw on my other ATI.
I happen to have an RV200, which I tried with F15BetaRC1, and while it was generally unusable for many reasons, the fonts were not corrupted as they are with RV250/280. So, I think that may support the idea of there just being a bug in the R200 implementation.
OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc. OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI R100 (RV200 5157) 20090101 TCL DRI2 OpenGL version string: 1.3 Mesa 7.11-devel
On Sat, 9 Apr 2011, mwesten@verizon.net wrote:
This hardware appears to be a write-off for Gnome3 now (see the comment by Owen Taylor at the BZ below), but I'll still point out something interesting I saw on my other ATI.
I happen to have an RV200, which I tried with F15BetaRC1, and while it was generally unusable for many reasons, the fonts were not corrupted as they are with RV250/280. So, I think that may support the idea of there just being a bug in the R200 implementation.
Yes, this was at time when gnome-shell run with nomodeset (e.g. without KMS). It was slow, but it was displayed properly.
Adam Pribyl