On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 18:40 -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > So, falling back on stable is solving your issues with the broken 
> > nvidia-module, if I'm reading you correctly?
> 
> I may have misspoken here.  I was using nvidia-kernel-1.0.6629 and having 
> missing symbol problems with the module in the running kernel
> (2.6.16-gentoo-r9, see <http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112356#c2>).  
> It 
> doesn't look as if this driver version is in the current stable 
> nvidia-drivers 
> version.  Both the stable and unstable are using 1.0.8762.  My understanding 
> is 
> that nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx are being phased out in favor of the 
> unitary 
> package nvidia-drivers, which contains both.

Yes and no.

The drivers have been split (by NVIDIA) into nvidia-drivers and
nvidia-legacy-drivers.  The legacy drivers support all the cards that
NVIDIA dropped support for with the > 7174 drivers.  Because of the
dropped support, we've been stuck on the ancient 6629 drivers on x86.  I
am about to file a stabilization bug for the 8762 and 7182 drivers and
legacy-drivers, respectively.  This will hopefully get us off the
nvidia-kernel/nvidia-glx drivers as quickly as possible.  This
transition will also allow us to more easily support X.Org 7.1, when
compatible drivers are released by NVIDIA.

> I don't run ~x86 stuff unless I have to, and sometimes I have to because 
> that's 
> where bug fixes get put.  Some people I've corresponded with just set 
> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 in their shell profile and run with it.  I haven't got 
> that kind of time!  Yes, it's too ... well, too unstable :-)

In this particular case, they're still ~arch simply to get more testing.
They are quite stable, in practice.

Also, some of us don't consider ~arch as "unstable" at all, and refuse
to put *anything* "unstable" into the tree unless under -* and
package.mask, like our policies dictate.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to