wolfi wrote:

On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 10:57, h g wrote:

...

I'm running 8.0 with the nVidia updates. Could someone please tell me which 2.4.19 kernel rpm I could use and where to find it.

TIA

Henry

This is a mirror which normally works well: ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/ftp.suse.com/suse/i386/update/8.0/kernel/LSB

But there is only an update to 2.4.18; this is the official update kernel for 8.0. The following: ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/suse/people/mantel/next/RPM offers you the latest development kernel.

Cheers .... Wolfi

Just be advised that if you use the mantel 2.4.19 kernel you will have to compile the nvidia driver yourself. It is not included with the mantel kernel rpm. *ALSO*, he now uses gcc 3.2 to compile his kernel and the nvidia makefile is set to detect this so the compile will fail. You will have to either upgrade your gcc to 3.2 or edit the makefile to ignore this (which is what I did), or compile the kernel AND driver with the gcc version you currently have installed. There is also an ignore_gcc_mismatch variable which you can set (according to nvidia) to force the compile to work but setting it didn't work for me. An email to Mr. Mantel asking for a workaround suggestion elicited a flaming response from him so don't expect too much help there. In the end, I upgraded my gcc to 3.2 as well so I won't have to deal with the mis-match again. SuSE doesn't offer 3.2 rpm's (at least not that I could find) so I used mandrake's (again, hmm I see a pattern developing). John S.

Anders Johansson wrote:

On Sunday 06 October 2002 15.40, John Scott wrote:

...

Just be advised that if you use the mantel 2.4.19 kernel you will have to compile the nvidia driver yourself. It is not included with the mantel kernel rpm.

Well, no, why would it be, but you can always use the rpms for SuSE 8.1 on nvidia's site. They're compiled for 2.4.19.

Doesn't matter why. I simply wanted to point out a possible pitfall so the poster would know in advance what he would need to do to get it working. That is what he asked for.

...

<snip> ...An email to Mr. Mantel asking for a workaround suggestion elicited a flaming response from him so don't expect too much help there.

I don't know what you wrote but it must have been severe. I've mailed him a couple of times and always received polite - and helpful - replies.

//Anders

"Must have"??? No, my email was quite polite and courteous I assure you. I thought he may have anticipated that this kind of problem might pop up when he started using a version of gcc other than the default version of the current shipping product at the time (8.0), and had a simple workaround already which he could pass to me. He could simply have said no, but he didn't. Apparently, he misunderstood the question and thought I was asking how to get the kernel to recompile instead of the driver. I clarified it in my reply but he didn't respond again. He was a bit rude to me, but then again we all have our off days hmm? Doesn't excuse his attitude, but I didn't let it ruin my day. If you don't believe me I could send you the entire thread off-line. Then again, what would be the point? I fixed the problem myself and went on with my life so it's water under the bridge at this point. John

This isn't directed to anyone specifically. It's just a general FYI. Hubert Mantel's kernel builds are test kernels. Which is why they are not in the updates directory but in his own directory. They are not offical and are "use at your own risk with no help from Hubert" type of thing. He won't support what isn't official and quite frankly shouldn't have to. Just because it's found on a public FTP server doesn't mean it's for public consumption. Also, remember that what some people say matter of factly with no offense intended can be mistaken as being rude. Hubert is one of the nicest people I know at SuSE, so I doubt he was trying to be a jerk about it. -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org Tell me what you believe.. I tell you what you should see.