Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-10-09 Thread Axel Thimm
On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 08:33:13AM -0300, Paulo Cavalcanti wrote: I looked at the nivida installer and there is both a nvidia_drv.o and a nvidia_drv.so However, ATrpms is including only nvidia_drv.o I changed the rpm to include both of them. I think we can keep both into the rpm. Thanks

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-11 Thread Paulo Cavalcanti
On 9/10/07, Paulo Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/10/07, Paulo Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/10/07, David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paulo, all, I removed the ATrpms nvidia RPMs and installed an equivalent set of livna RPMs (containing the

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-10 Thread David O'Shea
- From: David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paulo Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: atrpms-users@atrpms.net Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o? Hi Paulo, I'm trying to use http

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-10 Thread Paulo Cavalcanti
On 9/10/07, David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paulo, all, I removed the ATrpms nvidia RPMs and installed an equivalent set of livna RPMs (containing the 7185 release drivers) and these worked fine for me. I assume that this is because the livna RPM provides nvidia_drv.so instead of

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-10 Thread Marshall Crocker
. Regards, David - Original Message - From: David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paulo Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: atrpms-users@atrpms.net Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-10 Thread Paulo Cavalcanti
On 9/10/07, Paulo Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/10/07, David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Paulo, all, I removed the ATrpms nvidia RPMs and installed an equivalent set of livna RPMs (containing the 7185 release drivers) and these worked fine for me. I assume that

[ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-06 Thread David O'Shea
Hi, I'm trying to use http://dl.atrpms.net/all/nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7.i386.rpm on Fedora 7 with a RIVA TNT2 M64. When Xorg starts up, it reports 'Failed to load module nvidia (module does not exist, 0)'. This RPM contains nvidia-1.0-7185_drv.o and a symlink from nvidia_drv.o

Re: [ATrpms-users] nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7 should have .so instead of .o?

2007-09-06 Thread Paulo Cavalcanti
On 9/6/07, David O'Shea [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm trying to use http://dl.atrpms.net/all/nvidia-graphics7185-1.0_7185-74.3.fc7.i386.rpm on Fedora 7 with a RIVA TNT2 M64. When Xorg starts up, it reports 'Failed to load module nvidia (module does not exist, 0)'. This RPM contains