I attempted to make and install the new drivers, this failed miserably and I had to revert back to the older drivers. I would encourage anyone to jump to these new drivers with caution and make certain you have copies of the older RPMs for suse. I am running suse 7.3 with the 2.4.10 kernel. Jim 11/30/01 08:01:50 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

Maybe not, but it seems that the NVIDIA_GLX package there handles everything the way it's meant to. the libGL.so symlink, for instance. And the kernel module should be compiled from source anyway, so what's the diff?

//Anders

On Friday 30 November 2001 14:52, Cleary_Mike@emc.com wrote:

...

There are no SuSE rpms there yet........

MIke ------------------------------------------------------ Cleary_Mike@emc.com x6033 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Overflow on /dev/null, please empty the bit bucket.

-----Original Message----- From: dids [mailto:richard@diddyland.com] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:33 AM To: suse Subject: Re: [SLE] New NVIDIA drivers

On Friday 30 November 2001 10:45 am, Derek Fountain wrote:

...

Looks like a new set of NVIDIA drivers are out...

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=linux

Slower here, /usr/bin/gears gone from 1096 to 980 ftps :(

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com

How did it fail exactly? Tim Harrell 11/30/01 4:37:09 PM, James Bliss wrote:

I attempted to make and install the new drivers, this failed miserably and I had to revert back to the older drivers. I would encourage anyone to jump to these new drivers with caution and make certain you have copies of the older RPMs for suse.

I am running suse 7.3 with the 2.4.10 kernel.

Jim

11/30/01 08:01:50 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

...

Maybe not, but it seems that the NVIDIA_GLX package there handles everything the way it's meant to. the libGL.so symlink, for instance. And the kernel module should be compiled from source anyway, so what's the diff?

//Anders

On Friday 30 November 2001 14:52, Cleary_Mike@emc.com wrote:

...

There are no SuSE rpms there yet........

MIke ------------------------------------------------------ Cleary_Mike@emc.com x6033 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Overflow on /dev/null, please empty the bit bucket.

-----Original Message----- From: dids [mailto:richard@diddyland.com] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:33 AM To: suse Subject: Re: [SLE] New NVIDIA drivers

On Friday 30 November 2001 10:45 am, Derek Fountain wrote:

...

Looks like a new set of NVIDIA drivers are out...

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=linux

Slower here, /usr/bin/gears gone from 1096 to 980 ftps :(

Did you install the kernel source? Most of these errors look like they are having trouble resolving structures. Also make sure there is a link /usr/src/linux that points to the right kernel source. I have had trouble compiling with SuSE's kernel and so use the vanilla kernel myself. James Bliss writes:

These are the parameters which are used by make:

rm -f nv.o os-interface.o os-registry.o Module-linux nv_compiler.h NVdriver cc -c -Wall -Wno-unknown-pragmas -Wno-multichar -O -D__KERNEL__ -DMODULE - D_LOOSE_KERNEL_NAMES -D_X86_=1 -Di386=1 -DUNIX -DLINUX -DNV4_HW - DNTRM -DRM20 -D_GNU_SOURCE -DRM_HEAPMGR -D_LOOSE_KERNEL_NAMES - DNV_MAJOR_VERSION=1 -DNV_MINOR_VERSION=0 -DNV_PATCHLEVEL=2313 -I. - I/lib/modules/2.4.10-4GB/build/include nv.c

Warning and Error messages were many:

nv.c:250: warning: Initialization frmo imcompatible pointer type nv.c:251: warning: Initialization frmo imcompatible pointer type nv.c:252: warning: Initialization frmo imcompatible pointer type nv.c:253: warning: Initialization frmo imcompatible pointer type nv.c:255: warning: Initialization frmo imcompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nvox_probe_devices': nv.c:441: structure has no member named 'base_address' nv.c:444: structure has no member named 'base_address' nv.c: In function 'nvos_malloc': nv.c:564: warning: implicit declaration of function 'MAP_NR' nv.c:564: invalid type argument of '->' nv.c:583: invalid type argument of '->' nv.c: In function 'nvos_free': nv.c:612: invalid type argument of '->' nv.c: In function 'nv_kern_mmap': nv.c:1357: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1379: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1380: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1386: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1396: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1397: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1403: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1413: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c:1448: structure has not member named 'vm_offset' nv.c: In function 'nv_kern_poll': nv.c:1522: warning: passing arg 2 of 'poll_wait' from incompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nv_kern_ctl_poll': nv.c:1878: warning: passing arg 2 of 'poll_wait' from incompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nv_set_hotkey_occurred_flag': nv.c:1912: warning: passing arg 1 of '__wake_up' from incompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nv_kern_proc_read': nv.c:2038: incompatible types in assignment nv.c:2038: structure has no member named 'next' nv.c:2017: warning: 'dev' might be used unitialized in this function nv.c: In function 'nv_alloc_pages': nv.s:2367: invalid type argument of '->' nv.c: In function 'nv_free_pages': nv.s:2502: invalid type argument of '->' nv.c: In function 'nv_post_event': nv.c:2572: warning: passing arg 1 of '__wake_up' from incompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nv_post_vblank': nv.c:2589: warning: passing arg 1 of '__wake_up' from incompatible pointer type nv.c: In function 'nv_agp_init': nv.c:2640: warning: implicit declaratino of function 'get_module_symbol' make: *** [nv.o] Error 1

11/30/01 10:56:06 AM, Tim Harrell wrote:

...

How did it fail exactly?

Tim Harrell

11/30/01 4:37:09 PM, James Bliss wrote:

...

I attempted to make and install the new drivers, this failed miserably and I had to revert

back

...

...

to the older drivers. I would encourage anyone to jump to these new drivers with caution and make certain you have copies of the older RPMs for suse.

I am running suse 7.3 with the 2.4.10 kernel.

Jim

11/30/01 08:01:50 AM, Anders Johansson wrote:

...

Maybe not, but it seems that the NVIDIA_GLX package there handles everything the way it's meant to. the libGL.so symlink, for instance. And the kernel module should be compiled from source anyway, so what's the diff?

//Anders

On Friday 30 November 2001 14:52, Cleary_Mike@emc.com wrote:

...

There are no SuSE rpms there yet........

MIke ------------------------------------------------------ Cleary_Mike@emc.com x6033 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Overflow on /dev/null, please empty the bit bucket.

-----Original Message----- From: dids [mailto:richard@diddyland.com] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 8:33 AM To: suse Subject: Re: [SLE] New NVIDIA drivers

On Friday 30 November 2001 10:45 am, Derek Fountain wrote:

...

Looks like a new set of NVIDIA drivers are out...

http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=linux

Slower here, /usr/bin/gears gone from 1096 to 980 ftps :(

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com

Anders Johansson writes:

On Friday 30 November 2001 19:11, Jesse Marlin wrote:

...

Also make sure there is a link /usr/src/linux that points to the right kernel source.

Not anymore. It is /lib/modules/'uname -r'/build that should point to the source tree. /usr/src/linux shouldn't be used, and if you look at the cc command, that is the link that's used

Oops. Didn't know that. But where does the link in /usr/include/linux point to. Oops thats gone too. When a change is made to an include in the kernel how does it included now. Before /usr/include/linux pointed to /usr/src/linux/include.

//Anders

-- To unsubscribe send e-mail to suse-linux-e-unsubscribe@suse.com For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the FAQ at http://www.suse.com/support/faq and the archives at http://lists.suse.com

Jesse Marlin wrote:

Oops. Didn't know that. But where does the link in /usr/include/linux point to. Oops thats gone too.

If I remember correctly, /usr/include/linux is now for system headers, not kernel headers. Actually, I'd be really interested if someone can give me "the lowdown" on all this. I know Linus had a lot to say about it, and the distros have seemed to accomodate this wishes(?). -- TheBS -- Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org chat:thebs413 Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. http://www.linux-wlan.org President SmithConcepts, Inc. http://www.SmithConcepts.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- "The [US] Constitution guarantees you Free, not Fair. 'Fair' is a socialist concept." -- Shawn McMahon

Keith Winston wrote:

Since when did /usr/src/linux stop being the link to the kernel source??? I did a fresh install of the kernel source on 7.3 and it still created a link from /usr/src/linux to the actual kernel source at /usr/src/linux-2.4.10.SuSE/.

My /usr/include/linux is NOT a symlink, so it makes sense that it is the C lib headers instead of kernel headers.

--- Bryan-TheBS-Smith wrote:

...

Jesse Marlin wrote:

...

Oops. Didn't know that. But where does the link in /usr/include/linux point to. Oops thats gone too.

If I remember correctly, /usr/include/linux is now for system headers, not kernel headers. Actually, I'd be really interested if someone can give me "the lowdown" on all this. I know Linus had a lot to say about it, and the distros have seemed to accomodate this wishes(?).

I don't think that anyone said that there shouldn't be a link there, just that that link is no longer used for a link into the kernel when compiling kernel stuff. The link at /lib/modules/'uname -r'/build is now used. If you try to use the other one you will get a nasty message telling you that you are doing it wrong along with instructions on how to do it right. /usr/include/linux is the glibc peoples skeleton kernel headers for user apps only. Also the /usr/include/asm is the same way now. Mark Mark

Keith Winston wrote:

Well, damn. I just got this from the kernel README:

"Do NOT use the /usr/src/linux area!

You can safely ignore anything that says not to put a link from /usr/src/linux to /usr/src/linux-"rev". If you download a vanilla kernel from kernel.org and untar it it will go into linux. It's just using this link in compiling kernel modules etc. that is not going to work any more. The link is safe to be there. There is NOTHING wrong with having the link there. I beleive the README file has a typo in it. It should be stating not to use /usr/include/linux for kernel stuff, not that there should not be a link from /usr/src/linux to you real kernel sources. Althouh the link is no longer needed it can still be used as a short cut to cd to the kernel sources dir.

This area has a (usually incomplete) set of kernel headers that are used by the library header files. They should match the library, and not get messed up by whatever the kernel-du-jour happens to be."

So, you're right. Also, the build link was right where you said pointing to the actual kernel source. Just when I think I know what's going on...

--- Mark Hounschell wrote:

...

I don't think that anyone said that there shouldn't be a link there, just that that link is no longer used for a link into the kernel when compiling kernel stuff. The link at /lib/modules/'uname -r'/build is now used. If you try to use the other one you will get a nasty message telling you that you are doing it wrong along with instructions on how to do it right. /usr/include/linux is the glibc peoples skeleton kernel headers for user apps only. Also the /usr/include/asm is the same way now.