nvidia drivers from freshrpms.net
Lonni J Friedman
netllama at gmail.com
Fri Nov 3 16:35:09 UTC 2006
On 11/3/06, Todd Zullinger <tmz at pobox.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> Ed Greshko wrote:
> > Lonni J Friedman wrote:
> >> Something is misconfigured on your system if you need to hardcode
> >> the full path to the glx module.
> > That may be true. But, unless you can point to the misconfiguration
> > it is of little or no value.
> Pardon me if I expose my ignorance here...
> I think that the differences arise because of the way that the
> official nvidia installer does things versus the way that the nvidia
> rpms from livna (and I presume freshrpms) do them.
> AIUI, the nvidia installer overwrites the libglx.so from xorg. This
> works fine as far as calling Load "glx" in your xorg.conf, but it
> makes for more work the go back to the xorg driver should one need to.
> The livna packages install the nvidia libglx.so in a different
> directory to avoid clobbering the xorg libglx.so.
> The livna packages adds ModulePath lines in xorg.conf that ensure the
> proper glx is found. That makes specifying the full path to libglx.so
> unnecessary. Perhaps the freshrpms package hasn't done that?
> I have FC5 with the livna nvidia package here and the paths to
> libglx.so are:
> $ locate libglx.so
> The "Files" section of my xorg.conf has this:
> $ grep ModulePath /etc/X11/xorg.conf
> ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/nvidia"
> ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
> And then there's just a simple Load "glx" in the "Module" section.
> Works fine for me.
> Hopefully this is at least somewhat relevant and helpful. :)
You're probably correct. And if so, then this is a livna bug, as they
should be taking care of fixing xorg.conf to point to the correct glx
L. Friedman netllama at gmail.com
More information about the users