I've been talking to the AMD/ATI guys about getting ArchLinux packages
bundled with their catalyst releases, and was told something
interesting - apparently, the driver (kernel/Xorg) is independent of
the catalyst release, and is still versioned the "old way" - for
example, we used to have "fglrx 8.45.4" or whatever, and I changed it
to "catalyst YY.MM" when AMD started releasing their linux drivers as
'catalyst'. The thing with this is, there may be special versions of
the driver between catalyst releases for certain vendors, for example
- so catalyst 8.01 may have driver (fglrx) version 8.45.5, but then
they release a special version for laptop X that's 8.45.6, and isn't a
catalyst release, as it's geared to the specific laptop's hardware.
So, basically, I jumped the gun renaming fglrx to catalyst, as (in
general) it makes more sense to keep versioning it the old way (which,
at the time, I thought was going away, and was mistaken).
So, what I'm wondering is, should I re-rename the packages back to
fglrx? Leave them catalyst, and ignore any special versions that may,
at some point in the future, come out? Re-rename them to something
other than 'fglrx' to indicate they're the Radeon Proprietary drivers?
I'm not sure how to handle this, and suggestions are more than
I asked the ATI guys the same thing, and they said they'd prefer to
have some 'meta-package' called catalyst that depends on the
appropriate fglrx-* packages, which I don't really like, because then
the 'catalyst' package is an empty package, used only for the deps it