gforce 9400
in [Debian]
|
Prev: Complément d'informations Micrologiciel
Next: Bug Report : Running Pymol for terminal produce ImportError: No module named copy
From: steef on 14 Apr 2010 00:20 Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: > Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: >> steef wrote: >>> hi folk, >>> >>> got myself a asusrock standard atx mobo with a gforce 9400 (nvidia) >>> in a pci-express slot. i have to use the 195 4driver from *their* >>> site. the standard lenny driver for nvidia does not support this >>> hardware. (or am i wrong??) >>> >>> well: everything works fine except for ane thing: sometimes, quite >>> unexspected, my screen freezes completely; a nuisance. >>> >>> somebody with maybe the same experience and a solution for this >>> driver problem? >>> >> >> Hi Steef, >> >> I just got through with a frozen screen, etc. problem. >> >> The solution was upgrading X to the latest level and installing >> Nvidia's latest upstream driver: >> ftp://download.nvidia.com/XFree86/Linux-x86/195.36.15/ >> >> You have a link for your mobo? >> >> PS I always use Nvidia's upstream drivers. >> >> Hugo >> >> > > I bet you mean 'asrock' instead of 'asusrock' > > Hugo > > yes of course hugo! somewhat sleepy and a jetlag, steef -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4BC540D8.3060401(a)home.nl
From: Andreas Weber on 14 Apr 2010 05:10 On 2010-04-13 23:53, Charles Kroeger wrote: > anyone having problems with their Nvidia card and drivers should first > consult Lennart Sorensen's HOWTO: > > http://tinyplanet.ca/~lsorense/debian/debian-nvidia-dri-howto.html I did it, thanks to the author. Lean and clean written. However, I disagree with its content at some point. Is this whole Nvidia driver installation some kind of religious debate? Why use the wording "Make sure to remove all the garbage created by the nvidia installer..." if it really just works? I've been using the official driver installer since 2008, and it works absolutely easy. A 1 liner to install and the same to uninstall, AFAICS properly BTW. What tricked me yesterday: Why don't I get the 2.6.32-4 kernel that works with the 195.36.15 Nvidia driver although I have linux-image-2.6-amd64 installed? I had to install it manually. The document states "amd64: Any AMD or Intel apt-get install linux-image-2.6-amd64 ... That will keep you running the latest kernel released by Debian" And no, please no flaming, I have no intention to provoke someone. All I say is: The Nvidia installer really works easily. And yes, you'll have to kick the installer after kernel upgrades. As easy as the Debian way these days. I would really appreciate some technical hint about the benefits of the Debian way other than "the official installer suckz". And yes, of course I also read http://wiki.debian.org/NvidiaGraphicsDrivers which says "Advantages of "the Debian way": * More automated, which saves work if the kernel is changed. " and I disagree. > i.e. edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf -remove 'nivida' and replace with 'nv' > very handy when the compile fails. > and it will. Oh yes. ;-)
From: Lennart Sorensen on 14 Apr 2010 11:20 On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:03:06AM +0200, Andreas Weber wrote: > On 2010-04-13 23:53, Charles Kroeger wrote: > > anyone having problems with their Nvidia card and drivers should first > > consult Lennart Sorensen's HOWTO: > > > > http://tinyplanet.ca/~lsorense/debian/debian-nvidia-dri-howto.html > > I did it, thanks to the author. Lean and clean written. However, I > disagree with its content at some point. Is this whole Nvidia driver > installation some kind of religious debate? Why use the wording "Make > sure to remove all the garbage created by the nvidia installer..." if it > really just works? I've been using the official driver installer since > 2008, and it works absolutely easy. A 1 liner to install and the same to > uninstall, AFAICS properly BTW. It is based on the fact that the 'official installer' overwrites files belonging to debian packages. When those packages someday get upgraded, they overwrite what the nvidia driver installed, and then things break. I have helped enough people fix that kind of mess to know. Just a simple fact. Overwriting packages owned by a package is always a bad idea no matter how it is done, because someday the package will overwrite it back on you. > What tricked me yesterday: Why don't I get the 2.6.32-4 kernel that > works with the 195.36.15 Nvidia driver although I have > linux-image-2.6-amd64 installed? I had to install it manually. The > document states > "amd64: Any AMD or Intel apt-get install linux-image-2.6-amd64 ... That > will keep you running the latest kernel released by Debian" linux-image-2.6-X is not updated right away unfortunately in the case of unstable (and sometimes testing). It should always be up to date in stable though. I have never quite figured out how the kernel packagers decide when to update it. > And no, please no flaming, I have no intention to provoke someone. All I > say is: The Nvidia installer really works easily. And yes, you'll have > to kick the installer after kernel upgrades. As easy as the Debian way > these days. I would really appreciate some technical hint about the > benefits of the Debian way other than "the official installer suckz". > And yes, of course I also read It simply comes down to the fact that using the nvidia installer overwrites packaged files and that is "A bad thing"(tm). > http://wiki.debian.org/NvidiaGraphicsDrivers > > which says > "Advantages of "the Debian way": > * More automated, which saves work if the kernel is changed. " > and I disagree. Well I am thinking of trying to come up with a method that actually makes it try to compile the module if it is missing at boot. My wife thought it was rather unfriendly that her last upgrade (which gave her a new kernel) took away X. Sure recompiling the module with module-assistant was easy, but it had to be done manually. I will see if I can't find a way to automate that for those users that want it. > > i.e. edit /etc/X11/xorg.conf -remove 'nivida' and replace with 'nv' > > very handy when the compile fails. > > and it will. > > Oh yes. ;-) Sometimes it does. :) Also the nvidia installer for a long time hasn't worked with debian's 2.6.29 and higher kernels because they are now kbuild only (and hence don't allow compiler tests that the nvidia installer used to work unless they get converted to kbuild). I am not sure if it works with it yet. Those running their own kernels would of course never notice that problem since they have the full sources installed the way the nvidia makefiles assumed it would be. This same kernel header change also turned vmware modules into a nightmare as well as a few other out of kernel drivers. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100414145125.GM4307(a)caffeine.csclub.uwaterloo.ca
From: Andreas Weber on 14 Apr 2010 16:30
On 2010-04-14 16:51, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > It is based on the fact that the 'official installer' overwrites files > belonging to debian packages. When those packages someday get upgraded, > they overwrite what the nvidia driver installed, and then things break. > I have helped enough people fix that kind of mess to know. Good insights. Exactly what was of interest for me. > It simply comes down to the fact that using the nvidia installer > overwrites packaged files and that is "A bad thing"(tm). I fully agree, you got me converted to the Debian way. :-) Thanks for taking the time to answer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4BC623FF.5060805(a)worldwideweber.ch |