On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 17:00 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > You can run whatever you what, but when you are talking about fixing issues > with nVidia on Fedora then you bring in the expectations of the people who > work on Fedora not run it. For the most part the people who work on the > kernel have no interest in dealing with any nVidia problems. I didn't bring in those expectations. You already had them. And I would hope the main focus of the kernel maintainers is maintaining the kernel. nVidia should handle problems with their module, regardless of where it is discussed - with the understanding that there are appropriate forums for discussing all of these also being taken into consideration. > > 1) You implied, if not almost stated outright, that I have an > > expectation Fedora should fix and debug nVidia packages. That's false. I > > never even remotely went there. I have an expectation that Fedora will > > fix their own bugs, nVidia will fix their own bugs, and the two parties > > will kindly figure out how to work together under the circumstances that > > exist like adults instead of tantrum throwing children. > > If you are running a tainted kernel (for example using nVidia's drivers), > the kernel maintainers aren't going to spend time on any problems with > that configuration. If you can make the problem happen without having a > tainted kernel, then it might get looked at. I just love the "tainted kernel" part almost as much as the "then it might get looked at" statement if the problem really is theirs. If it's the kernel maintainers problem, then the kernel maintainers had better not only look at it, but fix it. The sole reason the nVidia driver "taints" the kernel is because nVidia supplies and links a non-GPL kernel module to the GPL kernel. If the very same module were GPL, the kernel wouldn't be "tainted". Last time I checked, the software license of a piece of software wasn't the primary determinant of that software's quality or supportability. The key is understanding who should be supporting what. For example: If I put an aftermarket engine part on my car and my car has an engine problem, the warranty on my car isn't instantly voided. If the engine had a problem not involving that part, the warranty must cover that repair. If the aftermarket part caused the problem, then the manufacturer of that part is the one on the hook for the repair according to whatever warranty they have (that's the law of the land in the US). In all the time I have run Fedora and nVidia, kernel issues from linking this module were far from the biggest problem I've had, and nVidia seems to do a reasonably good job handling their problems when they do come up. At least most of the time... In the meantime, if I have a problem with the kernel that doesn't deal with the nVidia module, I will rightly expect that the kernel maintainers will do their best to troubleshoot and resolve my bugzilla reports. They have in the past. Why would that change now? > > ...In the meantime I'll continue to play around with and provide > > feedback on Nouveau, and if it eventually suits my needs better than > > nVidia, I'll switch. > > That may be a while yet. 3D is still buggy, and the level of OpenGL support > is significantly behind what's in the closed drivers. Another aspect in > the mix is nVidia's proprietary CUDA stuff. I don't think opencl support > is that far along yet (though i don't follow that very closely), but you also > might not have an easy time switching and nVidia seems to be trying to get > lockin there. ...Which is why I run nVidia's driver. It also happens that I run VMware Workstation 7.0.2, which officially supports 3D graphics on Fedora using the proprietary nVidia drivers. As a VCP4 about to do the VCAP-DCA4 (I passed the version 3 exam last year), VMware is something I use for my job. I run vBox too. VMware doesn't do 3D graphics support on Linux with most of the OpenSource drivers, including Nouveau (since it can't handle 3D very well anyway). I also like the eye candy of Compiz, which Nouveau still chokes on. I'm not going to go out and spend money needlessly for an ATI (which has been a monster can of worms of its own with recent Fedora releases) or an Intel card just to avoid this. By the way, VMware Workstation doesn't support 3D graphics on Intel cards yet either. As to the lock-in, we'll see if they succeed. I have a feeling that they might indeed be trying, but they will probably fail in the end. They don't drive enough of the market to make good on that kind of strategy from what I can see. > > 2) You imply and try to make the case that running Fedora means I have > > to buy fully into the ultimate in "OpenSource Only" ideology. That's > > also false. No, I don't have to. I can run Fedora any way I want to, in > > combination with any other software I want to, as long as I follow the > > applicable licenses (in Fedora's case, the GPL). > > No, I was providing expections on the kind of support you can expect and > that if that support doesn't match your expectations another distro might > be better. But, again, these are your expectations and not mine. And mine are founded on many years of experience with Fedora and its predecessors. > The issue is with support, not use. It isn't just proprietary stuff. Problems > with any third party packages are really primarily the problem of the third > party packager. The onus is on them to demonstrate there is a bug in a > Fedora package. No arguments from me with the first part. But the onus actually needs to be on whoever, after a reasonable investigation, is most likely to have the problem. Even then, all parties need to remain actively involved with the effort of fixing the problem. That's why people need to cooperate and collaborate like adults. An attitude of "I'm not doing squat until you prove it's my bug" helps nobody. > I do like the trend for holding published interfaces more constant throughout > the lifespan of a release so that third party stuff can be used more > conveniently. Definitely. And as interfaces change, the change must have a reasonable enough notice for people to handle them. In response, those same people should adapt accordingly and in a timely manner. I have little patience for packages that still want to use interfaces of things that were documented as having been deprecated 3 and 4 years ago. VMware used to do that a lot, but lately they have been getting better. Citrix, OTOH, needs a little help. They still want Motif??? Really....?!? Chris -- ==================================================== "A man begins cutting his wisdom teeth the first time he bites off more than he can chew." --Herb Caen Pulitzer Prize-winning American columnist -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
