On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 10:38:23 +0100, Lubos Vrbka wrote:
> Florian Kulzer wrote:
> >Now I am confused:
> me too...
>
> >$ apt-file search nvidia_drv
> >nvidia-glx: usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.o
> >nvidia-glx: usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.o
> >nvidia-glx-legacy: usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.o
> i get empty output from apt-file.
>
> >Maybe the .so file comes from an older version of nvidia-glx. What is
> >the result of "dpkg -S nvidia_drv"?
> nvidia-glx: /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.so
>
> btw, dpkg -l nvidia-glx gives me
> 1.0.9625-2 NVIDIA binary XFree86 4.x driver
That is the driver from Experimental. (Maybe you mentioned that before
and I did not notice.) I have never tried that one myself so there
might be some 9xxx-specific issue that I don't know anything about.
OK, indeed the name is .so:
$ aptitude download nvidia-glx/experimental
$ dpkg-deb --contents nvidia-glx_1.0.9625-2_i386.deb | grep nvidia_drv
-rw-r--r-- root/root 1064588 2006-10-20 19:55
./usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/nvidia_drv.so
> >The only thing I know for sure from when I switched from the nvidia
> >installer to the Debian packages is that the .so and the .o module do
> >not play nicely together (at least if the .so file comes from the
> >nvidia installer).
> strange... there is really no .o file in xorg/modules/drivers/
It seems that there is a bug in apt-file: I have Experimental in my
sources.list and yet "apt-file search" did not tell me about the
nvidia_drv.so file, and in your case it comes up empty. Anyway, that
means my previous statements do not apply to your situation at all. I
am sorry for adding to the confusion.
--
Regards,
Florian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
