Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
50 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Daniele
Hi, I don't know if this is a packaging bug but:

Loading repository data...
Reading installed packages...
Computing distribution upgrade...

The following NEW packages are going to be installed:
  gcc gcc47 glibc-devel kernel-default-devel kernel-devel linux-glibc-
devel

The following packages are going to be upgraded:
  nvidia-computeG02 nvidia-gfxG02-kmp-default x11-video-nvidiaG02

3 packages to upgrade, 6 new.
Overall download size: 43.3 MiB. After the operation, additional 64.3
MiB will be used.
Continue? [y/n/?] (y): n

Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?

 bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
--
*** Linux user # 198661 ---_ ICQ 33500725 ***
    ***  Home  http://www.kailed.net  ***
        ***  Powered by openSUSE  ***

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Andrei Borzenkov
В Thu, 08 Nov 2012 18:32:57 +0100
Daniele <[hidden email]> пишет:

> Hi, I don't know if this is a packaging bug but:
>
> Loading repository data...
> Reading installed packages...
> Computing distribution upgrade...
>
> The following NEW packages are going to be installed:
>   gcc gcc47 glibc-devel kernel-default-devel kernel-devel linux-glibc-
> devel
>
> The following packages are going to be upgraded:
>   nvidia-computeG02 nvidia-gfxG02-kmp-default x11-video-nvidiaG02
>
> 3 packages to upgrade, 6 new.
> Overall download size: 43.3 MiB. After the operation, additional 64.3
> MiB will be used.
> Continue? [y/n/?] (y): n
>
> Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?
>
>  bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!

I noticed that since 304.60 (I skipped previous version)
nvidia-gfxG02-kmp actually compiles kernel module during installation. I honestly do not remember how it was in the past; may be I just did not pay attention.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Stefan Dirsch
In reply to this post by Daniele
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:

> Hi, I don't know if this is a packaging bug but:
>
> Loading repository data...
> Reading installed packages...
> Computing distribution upgrade...
>
> The following NEW packages are going to be installed:
>   gcc gcc47 glibc-devel kernel-default-devel kernel-devel linux-glibc-
> devel
>
> The following packages are going to be upgraded:
>   nvidia-computeG02 nvidia-gfxG02-kmp-default x11-video-nvidiaG02
>
> 3 packages to upgrade, 6 new.
> Overall download size: 43.3 MiB. After the operation, additional 64.3
> MiB will be used.
> Continue? [y/n/?] (y): n
>
> Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?

The GLUE layer is source and needs to be compiled.

>  bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!

This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
built on the target system.

Thanks,
Stefan

Public Key available
------------------------------------------------------
Stefan Dirsch (Res. & Dev.)   SUSE LINUX Products GmbH
Tel: 0911-740 53 0            Maxfeldstraße 5
FAX: 0911-740 53 479          D-90409 Nürnberg
http://www.suse.de            Germany
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix
Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Daniele
In data giovedì 08 novembre 2012 18:41:03, Stefan Dirsch ha scritto:
 
> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is
> now built on the target system.

Ok, thanks !
--
*** Linux user # 198661 ---_ ICQ 33500725 ***
    ***  Home  http://www.kailed.net  ***
        ***  Powered by openSUSE  ***

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Jiri Slaby-6
In reply to this post by Stefan Dirsch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/08/2012 06:41 PM, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
>> bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
>
> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer
> is now built on the target system.

Just curious... How this is done? Hopefully `make' is not run as root.
As it might damage the system like it was proven several times already.

- --
js
suse labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=KTAP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Andrei Borzenkov
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

В Thu, 08 Nov 2012 23:42:34 +0100
Jiri Slaby <[hidden email]> пишет:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/08/2012 06:41 PM, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
> >> bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
> >
> > This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer
> > is now built on the target system.
>
> Just curious... How this is done? Hopefully `make' is not run as root.
> As it might damage the system like it was proven several times already.
>

nvidia-gfxG02-kmp-desktop-304.64_k3.4.6_2.10-21.1.x86_64

postinstall scriptlet (using /bin/sh):
arch=x86_64
flavor=desktop
make -C /usr/src/linux-obj/$arch/$flavor \
     modules \
     M=/usr/src/kernel-modules/nvidia-304.64-$flavor \
     SYSSRC=/usr/src/linux \
     SYSOUT=/usr/src/linux-obj/$arch/$flavor
pushd /usr/src/kernel-modules/nvidia-304.64-$flavor
make -f Makefile.kbuild \
     nv-linux.o \
     SYSSRC=/usr/src/linux \
     SYSOUT=/usr/src/linux-obj/$arch/$flavor
popd
... etc

Also name/version of package is rather misleading now. It is not kmp
any more, it is src package. Basically it became DKMS in disguise.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlCcdOYACgkQR6LMutpd94zaOgCg1HLtMDKKe0vhTzR46y5dc7T/
tdMAn2QWCu1az9ULDYFHXmGlrkc6FhAt
=pwKV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
N▀╖╡ФЛr╦⌡yИ ┼Z)z{.╠Гзrз+кК╖╡ФЛr╦⌡z┼^·к╛z┼ЮN┤(·ж°╤ь^ё ч╜И ┼Z)z{.╠Гзrз+кЙ0²ЙХ╔ИЛ╨г╗╝
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Ludwig Nussel
In reply to this post by Stefan Dirsch
Stefan Dirsch wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
>> [...]
>> Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?
>
> The GLUE layer is source and needs to be compiled.
>
>>  bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
>
> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
> built on the target system.

That looks really broken. Why?

cu
Ludwig

--
 (o_   Ludwig Nussel
 //\
 V_/_  http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Bernhard M. Wiedemann-5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/09/2012 09:24 AM, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

> Stefan Dirsch wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
>>> [...] Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?
>>
>> The GLUE layer is source and needs to be compiled.
>>
>>> bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
>>
>> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE
>> layer is now built on the target system.
>
> That looks really broken. Why?

possibly to allow people to run more than just the openSUSE kernel.
Could also come very handy to have a working nvidia driver rpm on
Factory which was rare in the past.

Ciao
Bernhard M.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlCcyUYACgkQSTYLOx37oWRwXgCguyhTKqhFDFGaQh8eh8xnt/UC
N4wAnAhorgsgWtrk8TB3bJ8VbRbF/8wD
=NvSG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Andrei Borzenkov
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Bernhard M. Wiedemann
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/09/2012 09:24 AM, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
>> Stefan Dirsch wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
>>>> [...] Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?
>>>
>>> The GLUE layer is source and needs to be compiled.
>>>
>>>> bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
>>>
>>> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE
>>> layer is now built on the target system.
>>
>> That looks really broken. Why?
>
> possibly to allow people to run more than just the openSUSE kernel.

That's what DKMS is for. It does not belong to package that is called
KMP and is stamped with exact openSUSE kernel version
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Bernhard M. Wiedemann-5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/09/2012 10:44 AM, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Bernhard M. Wiedemann
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 11/09/2012 09:24 AM, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
>>> Stefan Dirsch wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:32:57PM +0100, Daniele wrote:
>>>>> [...] Why gcc and *-devel for binary driver ?
>>>>
>>>> The GLUE layer is source and needs to be compiled.
>>>>
>>>>> bug/change/something for next opensuse ?!
>>>>
>>>> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE
>>>> layer is now built on the target system.
>>>
>>> That looks really broken. Why?
>>
>> possibly to allow people to run more than just the openSUSE
>> kernel.
>
> That's what DKMS is for. It does not belong to package that is
> called KMP and is stamped with exact openSUSE kernel version

we don't seem to have DKMS in Factory?
http://software.opensuse.org/package/dkms

might be good to have it

Ciao
Bernhard M.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlCc0p8ACgkQSTYLOx37oWQRSwCgmsip6X4uS2VcCZr7512HvCzK
lFoAnRlWwfeqwXCmOMRDW0A/belOsx0N
=iDgI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Michal Marek
In reply to this post by Andrei Borzenkov
On 9.11.2012 04:13, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> Also name/version of package is rather misleading now. It is not kmp
> any more, it is src package. Basically it became DKMS in disguise.

No, it still is a KMP. It still uses the weak-updates machanism and it
has the same kABI dependencies as before. It's just that nvidia.ko is a
%ghost file and it does not have an average %post script.

Michal

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Dominique Leuenberger-3

Quoting Michal Marek <[hidden email]>:

> On 9.11.2012 04:13, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
>> Also name/version of package is rather misleading now. It is not kmp
>> any more, it is src package. Basically it became DKMS in disguise.
>
> No, it still is a KMP. It still uses the weak-updates machanism and it
> has the same kABI dependencies as before. It's just that nvidia.ko is a
> %ghost file and it does not have an average %post script.

We could also call ourselves Gentoo and do this in all %pre/%post  
scripts for all packages...

Frankly, What exactly is the advantage of having the workstation  
compile a .ko in this situation? What are we trying to resolve by  
doing this? Except 'offloading' build failures to the customers system  
instead of spotting them on OBS?

I somewhat fail to see a rational to do so (except for the fact of  
being 'different').

Best regards,
Dominique
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Michael Schroeder-4
In reply to this post by Stefan Dirsch
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:41:03PM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
> built on the target system.

Uh, doesn't that conflict with the new UEFI secure boot where all
kernel modules have to be signed?

Cheers,
  Michael.

--
Michael Schroeder                                   [hidden email]
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH,  GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dkms, module loading, and UEFI secure boot...(was Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!)

L A Walsh
Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:41:03PM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
>> This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
>> built on the target system.
>
> Uh, doesn't that conflict with the new UEFI secure boot where all
> kernel modules have to be signed?
>
> Cheers,
>   Michael.
------
        Secure boot is for HW vendors who want to turn PC's into
locked-down pieces of HW that are only upgrade-able at the vendors'
discretion.

        I got a heads-up on this due to a faulty UEFI bios that occasionally
complains about my not having a license to upgrade my memory configuration
(which my Dell machine doesn't 'currently' need), but in the future, the UEFI
Bios will allow the vendor have a lock on what HW you can put into your computer
and have it boot as well as what SW.

        The DKMS system isn't a conflict if the vendor allows your kernel
to load modules, but say your vendor uses Windows RT (which doesn't allow
HW to be shipped with an "open boot" and keep it's 'Windows RT ready'
sticker...  In such a case, DKMS wouldn't do you much good -- you can lock
down linux at least as much as windows.   You wouldn't be able to add
after-purchase upgrades like a larger HD unless you pay the vendor for
the privilege.

        We know some people will likely hack the systems to get root, but
for the average person, it will take away their ability to repurpose
or reuse a computer for anything other than what the manufacturer.
Seems like a large segment of the population is fine with not really owning
their electronics, and only getting usage from it as they pay for such
"by the App"...

        I posted something similar to this when OSuse spoke out about
providing a shim layer and 'buying into' this setup, in response to the
announcement.  Unfortunately, responses required "approval" before they
were posted (I was logged in with my registered account).  My response
detailing the above and a few other similar scenarios enabled by
vendors supporting signed-boot (vs. requiring PC's to be shipped with
a toggle switch), was never approved for publication among the responses,
though others appeared.   I thought that odd, but not entirely surprising.




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Stefan Seyfried
In reply to this post by Dominique Leuenberger-3
Am 12.11.2012 11:33, schrieb Dominique Leuenberger:

> I somewhat fail to see a rational to do so (except for the fact of being
> 'different').

It is legal to ship this package.
It is illegal to ship the precompiled nvidia.ko.

Yes, I think it's messy.
Yes, I guess that DKMS would be better suited for this (but I have never
taken a look at it before).
--
Stefan Seyfried
"If your lighter runs out of fluid or flint and stops making
 fire, and you can't be bothered to figure out about lighter
 fluid or flint, that is not Zippo's fault." -- bkw
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Andrei Borzenkov
В Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:55:57 +0100
Stefan Seyfried <[hidden email]> пишет:

> Yes, I guess that DKMS would be better suited for this (but I have never
> taken a look at it before).

If you will accept this I will prepare testing version including DKMS
package (I take it we do not yet have one?)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Juan Erbes-2
2012/11/12 Andrey Borzenkov <[hidden email]>:
> В Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:55:57 +0100
> Stefan Seyfried <[hidden email]> пишет:
>
>> Yes, I guess that DKMS would be better suited for this (but I have never
>> taken a look at it before).
>
> If you will accept this I will prepare testing version including DKMS
> package (I take it we do not yet have one?)
> --

This DKMS package will be usefull for the ATI Catalyst driver?

Because the trend is that Nvidia disappears from the desktop, because
on one hand almost no manufacturer is actually using Nvidia/Nforce
chipset, and on the other hand, as Intel and AMD are incorporating the
GPU within the microprocessor. Only the gamers adding a video card for
high performance gaming, and of them, most prefer the ATI video cards.

Nvidia's future appears quite dark.

Cheers,
             Juan
--
USA LINUX OPENSUSE QUE ES SOFTWARE LIBRE, NO NECESITAS PIRATEAR NADA Y
NI TE VAS A PREOCUPAR MAS POR LOS VIRUS Y SPYWARES:
http://www.opensuse.org/es/
Puedes visitar mi blog en:
http://jerbes.blogspot.com.ar/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Claudio Freire
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Juan Erbes <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> If you will accept this I will prepare testing version including DKMS
>> package (I take it we do not yet have one?)
>> --
>
> This DKMS package will be usefull for the ATI Catalyst driver?
>
> Because the trend is that Nvidia disappears from the desktop, because
> on one hand almost no manufacturer is actually using Nvidia/Nforce
> chipset, and on the other hand, as Intel and AMD are incorporating the
> GPU within the microprocessor. Only the gamers adding a video card for
> high performance gaming, and of them, most prefer the ATI video cards.
>
> Nvidia's future appears quite dark.

Sounds quite offtopic, but from someone that develops GPU-intensive
games, nVidia's OpenGL drivers are far more mature than ATI's, crash a
lot less when strained, and are a lot more robust regarding shader
capabilities. For development, I prefer nVidia every time.

However, a DKMS for ATI's Catalyst would indeed be quite useful. We
get tons of bug reports for ATI that sound like ATI open source
drivers issues, and we can't easily tell people to test with Catalyst
since installing it is not for newbies. This really hurts bug hunting.
Having it as a package would help a lot there.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!

Greg KH
In reply to this post by Michael Schroeder-4
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:48:15AM +0100, Michael Schroeder wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:41:03PM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
> > This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
> > built on the target system.
>
> Uh, doesn't that conflict with the new UEFI secure boot where all
> kernel modules have to be signed?

UEFI secure boot does not mandate signed kernel modules at all, that is
a separate option that some distros are enabling because they want a
more "secure" system than others.  Please don't confuse the two, they
are independant options.

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dkms, module loading, and UEFI secure boot...(was Re: Nvidia now requires devel packages ?!)

Greg KH
In reply to this post by L A Walsh
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 04:00:11AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:

> Michael Schroeder wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 06:41:03PM +0100, Stefan Dirsch wrote:
> >>This is *not* a bug, but an intentional change. ;-) The GLUE layer is now
> >>built on the target system.
> >
> >Uh, doesn't that conflict with the new UEFI secure boot where all
> >kernel modules have to be signed?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >  Michael.
> ------
> Secure boot is for HW vendors who want to turn PC's into
> locked-down pieces of HW that are only upgrade-able at the vendors'
> discretion.

Not at all, I want secure boot for my systems, with a key that I have
control over, to ensure that no one else has installed a boot loader on
it that I do not know about.

For that reason alone, you should want it as well.

> I got a heads-up on this due to a faulty UEFI bios that occasionally
> complains about my not having a license to upgrade my memory configuration
> (which my Dell machine doesn't 'currently' need), but in the future, the UEFI
> Bios will allow the vendor have a lock on what HW you can put into your computer
> and have it boot as well as what SW.

No, not at all, you have control over this, you can put your own keys in
the BIOS just fine.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

123