On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 23:16 -0500, Rajko M wrote:
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 20:26, Rajko M wrote: .....
It can be that Smart did just what is programmed to do, install rpm, run post-install script and that is all. New driver was in wrong place that only original SLED 10 software management can find.
The link nvidia_drv.so -> nv_drv.so is a part of default Xorg installation. It is the only thing in package: xorg-x11-driver-video-nvidia-6.9.0-46.i586.rpm that belongs to 10.1 GM and you can find it in suse/i586 directory on CD1. The nv_drv.so is in xorg-x11-driver-video-6.9.0-46.i586.rpm.
So, symlink is part of default 10.1 installation.
Smart did installation of nVidia rpm in a proper way, including running post-install script, but something is missing in that script than would place nvidia_drv.so in a right place. Missing part might be included in SLED 10.
At least we can see where the link came from. I am not loosing my mind. I wonder why this link would be done? Is X.org wanting to 'hide' the nvidia corp driver? I would think no one would have 'nvidia' in their X config unless they DID want the nvidia corp driver. Xorg should restrict itself to its own driver: nv. The xorg-x11-driver-video-nvidia rpm should only fiddle with Xorg's .'nv' driver. NOT nvidia corps' 'nvidia' driver. And, I think it does this destructively: The nvidia corp driver and kernel modules were already installed when this link was made. It effectively erased the nvidia corp driver and replaced it with a link to the Xorg driver. Thanks for your help. -- Roger Oberholtzer OPQ Systems AB Ramböll Sverige AB Kapellgränd 7 P.O. Box 4205 SE-102 65 Stockholm, Sweden Tel: Int +46 8-615 60 20 Fax: Int +46 8-31 42 23