Re: xorg 1.3 breaks 9755? (was Re: X11 display terribly slow after upgrade)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 04/22/07 15:58, Joe Hart wrote:
>> Ron Johnson wrote:
>>> On 04/22/07 14:16, Joe Hart wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> Which drivers are you using? On my system, the "nv" drivers are very
>>>> sluggish, and the new xorg broke my 97.55, so I upgraded to the new beta
>>>> 100.14.03, and performance is back.
>>> How? I'm using 9755 with xorg 1.3.0 and it works just fine.
>>> (Although xorg 1.3.0 changes the location of certain drivers so you
>>> have to run NVIDIA-Linux-x86-1.0-9755-pkg1.run with command options
>>> to point the module & library to new locations.
>
>> Yes, I saw your message. Quite ingenious of you to think of moving the
>> drivers like you did.
>
> Thanks for the compliment, but not my idea. The idea and command
> came from the nvidia forum (probably an nvidia employee).
>
> I only gussied it up a bit to make it reusable.
>
>> Me, I'm a freak for the latest things that will
>> break my system. That's why I run Sid and the beta drivers. Just so
>> you all know, I have a nice Etch partition to fall back on if I have to,
>> while I struggle to get my Sid working, but so far, all is well.
>
> I thought about installing 100.14.03, but saw too many bug reports.
>
> You're saying, though, that it works well (so far) and understands
> xorg 1.3.0's new directory layout?
>
Yes. I have seen no problems, Of course I still get pretty lousy fps
reports, but no worse (slightly better) than what I was getting before.
I get a whopping 880 fps, which is nothing compared to the 2500 or so I
have seen on other machince, but since my eyes can't see much beyond 30
fps, it really doesn't matter.
Joe
- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGLES2iXBCVWpc5J4RAh+7AJ4xMjeP3Arssy/s3k4W3Cn0KQp/YQCfQzJZ
Z1iS4U7dtHyd2QEVcm1Ac64=
=0uId
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: