On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski <curi...@bwv190.internetdsl.tpnet.pl> wrote: > On Mon, 29 Mar 2010, Andy Ritger wrote: > >> >> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Andy Ritger wrote: >>> >>> > > Historically, NVIDIA developed and maintained the xf86-video-nv X > >>> > > driver, >>> > > Our advice to owners of NVIDIA GPUs running Linux is to use the VESA >>> > > X >>> > driver from the time of Linux distribution installation until they can >>> > download and install the NVIDIA Linux driver from their distribution >>> > repositories or from nvidia.com. >>> >>> then NVIDIA could be so kind and fix the "NVIDIA Linux driver" >>> to build and work properly with alternate libc implementations, like >>> uclibc (glibc is hard-linked in libGL supplied with The Driver) >> >> Hello, Piotr. >> >> No, glibc is not statically linked into NVIDIA's libGL.so, if that is what >> you mean to imply. > > no, it just expects glibc being in the system. > >> If uclibc provided the same ABI as glibc then I would expect NVIDIA's >> libGL.so to work with uclibc. However, my understanding is that binary >> compatiblity (either with glibc or even with prior uclibc releases) >> is a non-goal of the uclibc project. > > yes, it is not binary-compatible glibc. > >> For better or worse, the NVIDIA driver is provided as binary-only, >> so it is not terribly well suited to deal with system library binary >> interface changes. >> >> Sorry, >> - Andy > > well, and that is what i'm complaining about... > mind you glibc will not be always binary compatible either across > it's own versions - same > as libc5 to glibc ("libc6") transition occured ad some point... > > this limits nvidia driver usage to specific libc implementation, > with specific version. > > nv driver itself served well for i.e. people who could sacrifice > 3d performance in i.e. netbooks, where they would rather focus > on battery and storage usage when choosing libc implementation. > if it quits being maintained and users are advised to move to > binary driver - it would be nice to make it actually compile on such > systems...
Just to posit, if you are intending on installing the nvidia binary driver on a niche built by hand system, then I don't think the glibc overheads would give you much cause. Wierdly you'd have gotten better battery life most likely using the binary driver since -nv doesn't have any powersaving abilities. So you are probably shooting yourself in the face to spite your foot or something. Dave. _______________________________________________ xorg@lists.freedesktop.org: X.Org support Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg