On Wednesday 26 August 2009 10:53:56 am Roman Kyrylych wrote: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 18:29, Aaron Griffin<aaronmgriffin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I half-way agree. The issue is that, no matter what you _intend_ with > > something, people will always do something you don't expect. It's part > > of the reason you see warnings like "Do not put in nose" on a package > > for an electric toothbrush :) > > > > We _may_ have to maintain the out-of-tree network drivers, at the very > > least, but I don't know if nvidia is worth it. Perhaps someone will > > begin making a side repo with additional LTS modules (*hint* *hint*) > > I think someone will make packages for drivers in AUR. > There are lots of driver packages for user-made kernels, > so driver packages for official kernel will surely appear in AUR. > Oh, I didn't mean to start a fire-storm. But for any of the kernels I have loaded on my boxes, I usually try to get X setup so if I have to do any lengthy file management, editing, etc. from the console, then I have the convenience of graphical interface should I need or want something that isn't provided in text mode. For the lts kernel, I agree, if the nvidia driver is a whole lot of work to prepare and maintain for the lts kernel, then it's not worth it. But, on the other hand, if it is fairly easy to put together a nvidia-lts package, then it might be something to consider. If the nvidia driver is too much of a pain to maintain, the how about the nv driver. That way all you would have to do is modify your xorg.conf and change "nvidia" to "nv" and restart X if you wanted a gui on the lts kernel. Either the radeon or radeonhd drivers would work fine for the other side of the house. The only reason I go to the trouble of getting X setup on the server boxes is that there are just some things that are easier done in X than from the console. I'm fine with vim, lynx, mc, etc... like them in fact and prefer them over their gui counterparts for a bunch of things. The intent here is *not* a complaint against lts at all. The lack of graphics driver capability on the lts kernel is fine (now that I understand its scope) and I agree there is no reason to rename "lts" to "server" -- I kind of like lts anyway. What led to this was Andreas request that the lts kernel be tested. Which is what I was doing -- I just go about testing in whacky ways.... All of this is just food for thought. As far as the feedback Andreas probably expected -- so far, the lts kernel works fine on my msi k9n2 box w/phenom processor. Apache2, bind, php5.3, ssl, etc.. all seem fine with the kernel. ( Next - I'll go see if I can get virtualbox to work on it and report back ) ((ducking....)) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. Rankin Law Firm, PLLC 510 Ochiltree Street Nacogdoches, Texas 75961 Telephone: (936) 715-9333 Facsimile: (936) 715-9339 www.rankinlawfirm.com
