# 7790 linux drivers trouble



## torgoth (Oct 7, 2013)

Hi! Im trying to install drivers for my GPU because Mint (linux mint cinnamon x64) notified me that if I dont install them the load will go on the CPU and thats not convenient for me, since I'm trying to run WCG :}
here just appeared again





so this is the trouble I ran into: 




How to install these types of files?
thanks in advance!


----------



## agent00skid (Oct 7, 2013)

Extract the .run file and set it as executable.


----------



## torgoth (Oct 7, 2013)

thank you, but this is what happens next:


----------



## BiggieShady (Oct 7, 2013)

Try running with  --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring  option to get required packages automagically


```
sudo ./amd-driver-installer-catalyst-13-4-x86.x86_64.run --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring
```

here is the whole guide http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=137660


----------



## Easy Rhino (Oct 10, 2013)

usually it means you don't have the right C library needed. check the log file it is referring to.


----------



## Killer_Rubber_Ducky (Oct 13, 2013)

Easy Rhino said:


> usually it means you don't have the right C library needed. check the log file it is referring to.



normally this is the build/compile/dev tools. They are very standard across linux distros for compiling programs and drivers. Usually they are : build-essential, g++, dpkg-dev, libc6-dev, and several others depending on the source code.


----------



## laptop-hpc (Oct 13, 2013)

I would avoid using the .run files from amd's site, since they're generic packages not made for any one version of linux, and may have dependency or other problems. EDIT: see posts below.
I don't run Mint, but it looks like there is an fglrx package available.

I _think_ this should work: Open a terminal and type

```
sudo apt-get install fglrx-updates fglrx-amdcccle-updates
```

That should install the latest Catalyst driver and the Catalyst control center, and whatever dependencies it needs.
Hope this helps.


----------



## Killer_Rubber_Ducky (Oct 13, 2013)

laptop-hpc said:


> I would avoid using the .run files from amd's site, since they're generic packages not made for any one version of linux, and may have dependency or other problems.
> I don't run Mint, but it looks like there is an fglrx package available.
> 
> I _think_ this should work: Open a terminal and type
> ...



On the contrary, the .run file builds from source and installs the driver package specific to your flavor of Linux. During the .run installation, it will ask you what you want to do. There is an option to install straight from source aka build from source and install (like make && make install) or, build a package for your distro. Also, the .run is usually more recent than the fglrx packages.


----------



## laptop-hpc (Oct 13, 2013)

Killer_Rubber_Ducky said:


> On the contrary, the .run file builds from source and installs the driver package specific to your flavor of Linux. During the .run installation, it will ask you what you want to do. There is an option to install straight from source aka build from source and install (like make && make install) or, build a package for your distro. Also, the .run is usually more recent than the fglrx packages.



Ah, that's interesting. The last time I used the .run package was a few years ago, and it didn't do that then, it just copied a bunch of stuff.
I guess my experience is out of date , so disregard what I said above.


----------



## de.das.dude (Oct 14, 2013)

try older drivers. newer driver for the 790 are bad. 13.8 is good.


----------



## Peter1986C (Oct 14, 2013)

@DDD: What is true for Windows drivers is not necessarily true for Linux drivers. Different motor under the hood.


----------



## de.das.dude (Oct 14, 2013)

Chevalr1c said:


> @DDD: What is true for Windows drivers is not necessarily true for Linux drivers. Different motor under the hood.



i know that... but not necessarily different engineers coding the shit. They are the same, and they are bound to make the same silly mistakes.

afaik linux and windows kernel is not that different after all.


----------



## Killer_Rubber_Ducky (Oct 14, 2013)

de.das.dude said:


> i know that... but not necessarily different engineers coding the shit. They are the same, and they are bound to make the same silly mistakes.
> 
> afaik linux and windows kernel is not that different after all.



are you serious? There is a very big difference. 

First: The comparison 

Both architechtures are Monolithic (with exceptions)
Both have USB user-space drivers
Both have user-space printing
Linux has user-space filesystem (FUSE, etc), Windows has that with freeware
Both have user-space audio
both have user-space graphics aka GUI

Below is a table I cobbled together and uploaded as a screenshot since the forum table code does not work. *This table data comes from Wikipedia as well as all the following screenshots.*







































































Moreover the site mentions that Linux has the following while it's not sure if Windows can do it:

Capability-based security
In-kernel key management keyctl
Audit-API fanotify
Sandbox SELinux, KVM, seccomp
Synflood protection Syncookies

Also, Windows Source Code is proprietary vs Linux Open source GPL

Windows Kernel is a mixture(hybrid) of microkernel and Monolithic
In Linux the "execution unit" is a "process or task" whereas in Windows it is a "thread"
Linux has a simpler, more logical  kernel API, and is more robust because 
of it.

Read some Phoronix articles on The Linux Kernel. Such as "Linux 3.12 Brings Big AMD Radeon Improvements"

There are BIG differences between Windows Kernel and Linux Kernel.


----------



## Peter1986C (Oct 15, 2013)

Thanks for speaking up, I could not have worded it better (I do not have an IT background and therefore am still exploring the more low-level stuff).


----------

