Where does the livna repository fit in with FC9?

[Christopher A. Williams]

On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 01:18 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Christopher A. Williams wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 15:04 -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 5, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Christopher A. Williams
> >> <chrisw01 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> > I already knew about the new ABI in X on F9. One would think that if
> > there are apparently current nVidia drivers in a Rawhide oriented
> > development repo that they would use the new ABI. Otherwise, why waste
> > the space on a disk?
> > 
> > Guess I assumed wrong and should have considered these drivers trash
> > from the start. So much for thinking they (the Livna maintainers) were
> > ahead of the game. To that end, I'm sure plenty of folks are already
> > yelling at nVidia, not that I won't join the chorus... :)
> 
> If the older proprietary drivers are broken with the new ABI, there is 
> nothing Livna maintainers can do as they don't have the rights to the 
> code to fix it. The open drivers like Intel work fine. So does the 2D nv 
> driver for that matter.

I wasn't blaming the Livna maintainers - rather I had hoped they had
more access than they apparently do. I've read on NV News there is a
beta driver for X version 1.5, but it is apparently a closed, private
beta.

The real question is will F9 release with a pre-release version of X,
causing vendors like nVidia not to support it until X 1.5 Stable
releases. If so, that's bad as I'd bet most people aren't going to go
switch out video cards just for that. Count me in that group.

...And the 2D nVidia driver may work fine for 2D stuff, but you can't do
loads of important things (to me and my kids at least - think Extreme
Tux Racer for example) without the 3D accelerated driver.


--
===========================
"If you are calm while all around you is chaos,
then you probably haven't fully understood
the magnitude of the situation."

--Unknown