>>>>> "jay" == Jay DeKing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi jay> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 5:51 am, John Allen honored me with this jay> communique: >> On Tuesday 07 October 2003 21:47, Luca Olivetti wrote: >> > John Allen escribió: >> > > Don't use NVIDIA's 4496. Anything later than 4191 is a disaster; from >> > > console more screwups to reboots, and X hard locks. >> > >> > Funny, I could say the same for anything *earlier* than 4363 (adding >> > filesystem corruption to the mix). >> > Maybe it's just nvidia releasing crap in *every* version. >> >> Ah well, YMMV as they say. >> >> I have found that with my geForce4 MX440's only 4191 is stable. >> >> > Bye jay> Still running 4191 myself: GeForce MX 420. Can't get anything later to compile jay> properly, and 4191 seems to work just fine. jay> I hate those darn ".run" files, anyway. Grrr, NVidia cards are just making my life miserable. I have almost the same hardware that one of the Bug reporters and things work well for me. I need to try to found a pattern somewher. Until now it appears that: - drivers 4363 works for a lot of people. - drivers 4496 fails for several people (they work for me). Can people please mail me the output of lspcidrake -v and telling me what versions work/don't work for you? I have found that machines fail with PIII, PIV and athlons, both with NVidia IGP and normal cards. Only pattern found until now are that the following cards fail: - GForce MX - Gforce2 MX - IGP (Gforce4 MX) - standalone GForce4 MX At least the: - GForce3 Ti500 work (guess what is the card that I have) Current theory is that: New driver with cards older than GForce3 fail. GForce4 MX if I remember correctly is just a GForce2 core "on steroids". Later, Juan "learning too much about NVidia graphics cards". -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
