issues in 1.00

David Kewley
Tue Dec 9 18:50:00 2003 wrote on Tuesday 09 December 2003 15:20:
> I have actually already created an Nvidia DKMS RPM for version 1.0-4496 for
> our Precision Workstations. It takes care of building/rebuilding the
> nvidia.o module, as well as laying down the X libraries. I should have it
> up on sometime this week (I'll send the link once it's
> up). Take a look at it and see how my methods compare to yours...maybe
> you'll have some different ideas that I can incorporate.


That's excellent!  I assume there's nothing Dell-specific about the actual 
contents of the rpm (just the Packager: tag)?  We have Precision 
Workstations, but also many other Dell machines and many non-Dell machines.

I expect the rpm would simply be a very useful thing to many people around the 
world, if you released it broadly.  I would be happy to use it instead of 
building my own, if it works well for me.  And if you want feedback when I 
find issues, I'll be happy to provide that.

My specfile is to the point of rpmbuild -bi apparently working correctly, plus 
an untested and probably-incomplete %pre script.  I've lightly patched the 
NVIDIA Makefiles and used them to do as much grunt work as possible.  (As 
opposed to other [non-dkms] nvidia rpms I've seen out there that copy the 
Makefiles' work into the specfile.)

I'm happy to pass any of this to you, if you're interested.  I simply want to 
solve the problem, and secondarily get some credit for whatever I do provide.  
I'd be happy to use your nvidia graphics dkms rpm, or work with you on it, 
rather than do it all myself. :)

The point I'm at now is figuring out the best way to deal with the X libs, 
considering the possibility of upgrading the XFree86* packages, and the 
possibility of upgrading or uninstalling the nvidia package.  If you've 
already done all this work, that's great.  It's an interesting shadow problem 
to what dkms does, and I wonder about the possibility of code reuse...

At a meeting just now, my colleages and I settled on nvidia-gfx instead of 
nvgfx.  They pointed out that the "nv" namespace is already confused by 
NetVault versus NVIDIA.  I don't particularly like nvidia-graphics, which 
makes an already long dkms rpm name even longer.

I'm eagerly looking forward to what you have; I may shift some of my attention 
to other pressing issues in the next few days, knowing that you're about to 
release your rpm.