On 4/30/24 2:23 AM, Javier Perez wrote:
What kernel are you using?
The bad patching ("dnf upgrade" early this month) was from
6.7.11-100.fc38x86_64 to 6.8.4-100.fc38x86_64.
The good patching Saturday was from 6.7.11-100.fc38x86_64 to
6.8.7-100.fc38x86_64.
The full upgrade ("dnf
What kernel are you using?
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024, 21:15 home user wrote:
> On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
> > (f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
> kmod 4xx driver)
> >
> > I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to
> upgrading from
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor; kmod 4xx
driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to upgrading from
f-38 to f-39.
There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver
On 15/04/2024 20:02, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
After a few days of being seriously side-tracked, I can try to get back
to this.
Those who explained the kernel numbering: thank-you.
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
kmod 4xx
On 4/15/24 14:02, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
There's
1.
(Thomas)
I finally just nuked all the RPMFusion packages and downloaded the
drivers directly from https://www.nvidia.com/download/index.aspx and
ran the installer from there. It works fine again.
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
After a few days of being seriously side-tracked, I can try to get back to this.
Those who explained the kernel numbering: thank-you.
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor; kmod 4xx
driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf
On 4/14/24 17:21, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
So, not sure why it works with 6.7.x but not with 6.8.x.
Something changed in the kernel and the NVidia driver needs to be
changed to work with it. The driver is out of tree so it doesn't get
fixed by the people making the change like
On 14 Apr 2024 at 18:50, John Pilkington wrote:
Date sent: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 18:50:40 +0100
Subject:Re: crippling nvidia display issue.
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
From: John Pilkington
Send reply to: Community
On 14/04/2024 16:22, Michael D. Setzer II via users wrote:
On 15 Apr 2024 at 0:29, Michael D. Setzer II via user wrote:
Just as an additional note. I have an older Acer notebook that has
an NVIDIA GT 650M that had been working fine with the
rpmfusion driver. Have BOINC using its GPU for a
On 15 Apr 2024 at 0:29, Michael D. Setzer II via user wrote:
To: Community support for Fedora users
Date sent: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:29:38 +1000
Subject:Re: crippling nvidia display issue.
Priority: normal
Send reply to: mi
On 14 Apr 2024 at 12:47, John Pilkington wrote:
Date sent: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 12:47:57 +0100
Subject:Re: crippling nvidia display issue.
From: John Pilkington
To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org
Send reply to: Community
On 12/04/2024 12:58, John Pilkington wrote:
On 12/04/2024 00:52, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:39 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:36, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
> On 12 Apr 2024, at 01:06, Tom Horsley wrote:
>
> My system gets regular updates. I've never had a yadda-yadda-100 kernel,
> all mine are -200. Currently I'm running 6.8.4-200.fc39.x86_64, all the
> kernels in my old fedora 38 partition are also -200, not -100.
The -NNN is the version that
On 12/04/2024 00:52, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:39 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:36, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
home user composed on 2024-04-11 19:49 (UTC-0600):
> What does the -100 vs. -200 signify?
From observation, not reading any doc:
A fresh Fedora release gets -300, moving the prior release to -200, and the
prior
to prior release to -100. After the prior-prior's support ends, there is only
On 4/11/24 18:49, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 7:00 PM, Go Canes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 8:06 PM Tom Horsley
wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:52:10 -0600
home user wrote:
kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64
Possibly relevant, but I don't know what it means for sure:
My system gets
On 4/11/24 7:00 PM, Go Canes wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 8:06 PM Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:52:10 -0600
home user wrote:
kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64
Possibly relevant, but I don't know what it means for sure:
My system gets regular updates. I've never had a
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 8:06 PM Tom Horsley wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:52:10 -0600
> home user wrote:
>
> > kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64
>
> Possibly relevant, but I don't know what it means for sure:
>
> My system gets regular updates. I've never had a yadda-yadda-100 kernel,
> all
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:52:10 -0600
home user wrote:
> kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64
Possibly relevant, but I don't know what it means for sure:
My system gets regular updates. I've never had a yadda-yadda-100 kernel,
all mine are -200. Currently I'm running 6.8.4-200.fc39.x86_64, all the
On 4/11/24 5:39 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:36, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
/tmp/akmodsbuild.2VNb1GB1/BUILD/nvidia-470xx-kmod-470.223.02/_kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64/nvidia-drm/nvidia-drm-drv.c:748:40:
error:
On 4/11/24 16:36, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
/tmp/akmodsbuild.2VNb1GB1/BUILD/nvidia-470xx-kmod-470.223.02/_kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64/nvidia-drm/nvidia-drm-drv.c:748:40:
error: 'DRM_UNLOCKED' undeclared here (not in a
On 4/11/24 5:31 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
/tmp/akmodsbuild.2VNb1GB1/BUILD/nvidia-470xx-kmod-470.223.02/_kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64/nvidia-drm/nvidia-drm-drv.c:748:40:
error: 'DRM_UNLOCKED' undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean
'VM_LOCKED'?
On 4/11/24 16:05, home user wrote:
/tmp/akmodsbuild.2VNb1GB1/BUILD/nvidia-470xx-kmod-470.223.02/_kmod_build_6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64/nvidia-drm/nvidia-drm-drv.c:748:40:
error: 'DRM_UNLOCKED' undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean
'VM_LOCKED'?
There has been a kernel change of some
On 4/11/24 4:45 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 15:40, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 4:34 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 13:01, home user wrote:
I tried the command suggested in that log file.
--
bash.24[~]: /usr/sbin/akmods --force
Checking kmods exist for 6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64
On 4/11/24 15:40, home user wrote:
On 4/11/24 4:34 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 13:01, home user wrote:
I tried the command suggested in that log file.
--
bash.24[~]: /usr/sbin/akmods --force
Checking kmods exist for 6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64 [ OK ]
Building and installing
On 4/11/24 4:34 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 4/11/24 13:01, home user wrote:
I tried the command suggested in that log file.
--
bash.24[~]: /usr/sbin/akmods --force
Checking kmods exist for 6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64 [ OK ]
Building and installing nvidia-470xx-kmod
On 4/11/24 13:01, home user wrote:
I tried the command suggested in that log file.
--
bash.24[~]: /usr/sbin/akmods --force
Checking kmods exist for 6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64 [ OK ]
Building and installing nvidia-470xx-kmod [FAILED]
Building rpms failed; see
On 4/11/24 11:19 AM, home user wrote:
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor; kmod 4xx
driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to upgrading from
f-38 to f-39.
There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver
home user wrote:
> I tried the command suggested in that log file.
>
> --
> bash.24[~]: /usr/sbin/akmods --force
> Checking kmods exist for 6.8.4-100.fc38.x86_64 [ OK ]
> Building and installing nvidia-470xx-kmod [FAILED]
> Building rpms failed; see
>
On 4/11/24 12:34, Tom Horsley wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:09:26 -0700
Doug Herr wrote:
I don't have Nvidia currently and can't remember where you find those logs.
/var/log/akmod/akmod.log
If it doesn't say something about "Success" near the end, then it didn't
build correctly.
I usually
On 4/11/24 12:09, Doug Herr wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024, at 10:19 AM, home user wrote:
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
kmod 4xx driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to
upgrading from f-38 to f-39.
There were no hints of any
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 15:12:08 -0400
Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> When something does not (can not?) build correctly, can you just boot
> to an earlier kernel until the problems with the current kernel
> modules are fixed? Or does rebuilding akmod break past kernels?
I've certainly just booted old
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 2:35 PM Tom Horsley wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:09:26 -0700
> Doug Herr wrote:
>
> > I don't have Nvidia currently and can't remember where you find those logs.
>
> /var/log/akmod/akmod.log
>
> If it doesn't say something about "Success" near the end, then it didn't
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:09:26 -0700
Doug Herr wrote:
> I don't have Nvidia currently and can't remember where you find those logs.
/var/log/akmod/akmod.log
If it doesn't say something about "Success" near the end, then it didn't
build correctly.
I usually do a tail -f on that file when running
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024, at 10:19 AM, home user wrote:
> (f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
> kmod 4xx driver)
>
> I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to
> upgrading from f-38 to f-39.
> There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and
On 4/11/24 12:19, home user wrote:
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
kmod 4xx driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to
upgrading from f-38 to f-39.
There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver
were
(f-38; stand-alone work station; nvidia graphics card; dual monitor;
kmod 4xx driver)
I just finished doing a "dnf upgrade" as a prerequisite step to
upgrading from f-38 to f-39.
There were no hints of any problems. The kernel and the graphics driver
were replaced during this "dnf upgrade".
37 matches
Mail list logo
