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]