On Tuesday 30 Jun 2009 06:39:18 Bryce Harrington wrote: > I guess Nvidia will be upping the version number at least once a Ubuntu > release, perhaps more, and I'm concerned this causes more work for us > than it should. The bug transitioning is also rather disruptive to > users, and a lot didn't follow directions quite right. In theory the > transition would have let us drop a lot of old bugs, but in reality we > ended up with just as many bugs filed against -180, if not more, but > just without the comment history. It felt like a lot of effort for > little benefit. > > Now we've transitioned from 180 to 185. I actually left the source > package name still as nvidia-graphics-drivers-180 this time, but I don't > really think this is a feasible solution either, as it's causing > confusion among users. > > So, I'd like to propose we modify the naming scheme for nvidia drivers. > Legacy drivers would be named the same as before, > nvidia-graphics-drivers-96 and nvidia-graphics-drivers-173. But the > active driver should be named something static, like > nvidia-graphics-drivers-new or whatever (I'm open to better names). > > How do you guys feel about this approach? > > Bryce
I see your point and I'm not against the idea. If we decide to implement it, I think there will be some things to deal with though: 1) Changes to nvidia (not only in the latest driver): * postinst, etc. scripts (let's not forget the diversions mess) * the way we generate the modalias file 2) Changes to Jockey: * the way it gets the driver version (by parsing the modalias file) will have to be different for the nvidia-latest (or whatever we decide to call it) package. NOTE: I can deal with this if you want. Regards, -- Alberto Milone Sustaining Engineer (system) Foundations Team Canonical OEM Services -- Ubuntu-x mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-x
