On Tuesday 28 December 2004 02:27, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: > > If the interface between kernel and user-space doesn't change then all > > they need to do is have one RPM for the shared objects and a set of RPMs > > that install .ko's in the correct places for each kernel. You would just > > have to make sure that every time you upgrade your kernel you install the > > matching drivers. If you didn't install the drivers then the symptom > > would be a lack of 3D graphics which would be easy to fix. > > The reason why "they" did it the way "they" did, with one installer for > everybody, was precisely because all the "you" out there would encounter > issues with "install the matching drivers" - what qualifies as "easy to > fix" for most readers of this list results in a call to the vendor for Joe > Sixpack. So what do they do instead? Force a binary-only module to be loaded into a kernel of a version other than the one it was created for? That's a recipe for disaster! I hope that the users of the NVidia drivers don't have any important data on their machines... > (Hell, just the last 48 hours I had a mysterious X.org issue caused by two > conflicting NVidia libraries, a crufty one in one directory, a current > version in another, and the symptoms depended on what order ldconfig found > things in ld.so.conf....) It seems that the NVidia drivers suck in many ways. What's the best option for 3D graphics in Linux nowadays? Not NVidia I guess. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
