Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: General Discussion about Arch Linux <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?
From: Nowaker <enwukaer@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 14:11:34 +0200
In-reply-to: <CAJTPdErt9k_XE0TkzDhyODbOnNJa=EMnE-Vwmi2KyUKFKZbDTw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: General Discussion about Arch Linux <arch-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0

Dimitris,

You may find this news interesting:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTY4MTc

--
Kind regards,
Damian Nowak
StratusHost
www.AtlasHost.eu

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?
  - From: Dimitris Zervas

References:
- Is ATI more... "compatible"?
  - From: Dimitris Zervas

Prev by Date: Re: Xbmc not boot
Next by Date: Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?
Previous by thread: Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?
Next by thread: Re: Is ATI more... "compatible"?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Wireless] [Linux Kernel] [ATH6KL] [Linux Bluetooth] [Linux Netdev] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [IDE] [Security] [Git] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux ATA RAID] [Samba] [Device Mapper]

Powered by Linux