Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next

techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 3986
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
sgfxi gets the gcc version from /proc/version and it then slices out the first digit, and the first decimal, like: 4.9, or, in your case, 5.1

However, I see in debian that for some reason even though your kernel is compiled with gcc 5.1, the only package present in apt sid is gcc-5 not 5.0 not 5.1, so it seems like it's possible they changed something for some reason apt is now showing gcc-5 without the decimal.

Hmm, that's unfortunate. I don't like it when debian does totally pointless changes like this, though it is easier to track gcc if you don't know the subversion number, ie, it looks like they are using a sort of meta format for gcc numbers as of 5, not the previous decimal version.

I'll try to do an update/hack of that.

I checked, in debian for this moment they aren't using the decimal as of gcc-5 so I've updated sgfxi to go for just the first digit of the system gcc when >=5 gcc version.

So sgfxi should work now, at least judging from debian package pool info.
Back to top
DeepDayze
Status: Contributor
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 108
Reply Quote
:: techAdmin wrote ::
sgfxi gets the gcc version from /proc/version and it then slices out the first digit, and the first decimal, like: 4.9, or, in your case, 5.1

However, I see in debian that for some reason even though your kernel is compiled with gcc 5.1, the only package present in apt sid is gcc-5 not 5.0 not 5.1, so it seems like it's possible they changed something for some reason apt is now showing gcc-5 without the decimal.

Hmm, that's unfortunate. I don't like it when debian does totally pointless changes like this, though it is easier to track gcc if you don't know the subversion number, ie, it looks like they are using a sort of meta format for gcc numbers as of 5, not the previous decimal version.

I'll try to do an update/hack of that.

I checked, in debian for this moment they aren't using the decimal as of gcc-5 so I've updated sgfxi to go for just the first digit of the system gcc when >=5 gcc version.

So sgfxi should work now, at least judging from debian package pool info.


Thanks for the bug fix, and sgfxi now works for gcc 5.1 and the driver was built fine. the default gcc is still 4.9 on my system however, as the Siduction kernel I was using was built with 5.1 thus pulling in the gcc 5 packages.
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 3986
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
good to catch and handle this change before too many systems were with gcc 5.1 kernels.
Back to top
DeepDayze
Status: Contributor
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 108
Reply Quote
:: techAdmin wrote ::
good to catch and handle this change before too many systems were with gcc 5.1 kernels.


Yes, and very soon Debian will be using gcc5.1 as default system compiler, so yes that little bug needed to be squashed :)
Back to top
Debian Kernel 4.6.1-1 sgfxi-NVIDIA Installation Error
Chris M
Status: Contributor
Joined: 11 Aug 2013
Posts: 63
Reply Quote
Hope this is the appropriate place to post this.

paste.debian.net/737825 or paste.debian.net/download/737825

snip:

:: Code ::
/usr/src/linux-headers-4.6.0-1-common/Makefile:1446: recipe for target '_module_/usr/src/sgfxi-downloads/NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-364.19/kernel' failed
make[2]: *** [_module_/usr/src/sgfxi-downloads/NVIDIA-Linux-x86_64-364.19/kernel] Error 2
make[2]: Target 'modules' not remade because of errors.
make[2]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/linux-headers-4.6.0-1-amd64'
Makefile:146: recipe for target 'sub-make' failed
make[1]: *** [sub-make] Error 2
make[1]: Target 'modules' not remade because of errors.
make[1]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/linux-headers-4.6.0-1-common'
Makefile:81: recipe for target 'modules' failed
make: *** [modules] Error 2
ERROR: The nvidia kernel module was not created.
ERROR: Installation has failed.  Please see the file '/var/log/nvidia-installer.log' for details.  You may find suggestions on fixing installation problems in the README available on the Linux driver download page at www.nvidia.com.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  ERROR: (245) The nvidia installer exited with the error: 1


Using straight Debian SID, and the latest 364.19 driver failed. To get up and running, I manipulated the script to reference 367.18 BETA and then I physically downloaded the BETA, and inserted it into /usr/src/sgfxi-downloads/.

Installation of the BETA complained:

:: Code ::
ERROR: (226) The driver you selected: 367.18 does not support your current Xorg version: 1.18.3
If this is wrong, please let the script maintainer know.
You can override this test with -! 6 option. If install works, let maintainer know.


So I used the -! 6 option, and I'm up and running on Kernel 4.6.1-1 with the 367.18 BETA driver.

Perhaps this is just a new Debian kernel issue.
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 3986
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
Updated, added 367 beta, updated support for 367
Back to top
DeepDayze
Status: Contributor
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 108
Reply Quote
Any patches for the 340 series nvidia drivers yet and will that script be able to work with it?
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 3986
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
Haven't seen a patch, but haven't looked either. I'm also stuck on an older kernel on one machine because of this.
Back to top
DeepDayze
Status: Contributor
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 108
Reply Quote
:: techAdmin wrote ::
Haven't seen a patch, but haven't looked either. I'm also stuck on an older kernel on one machine because of this.


Looking to replace my current 9800GTX with a newer card and currently looking at a GTX 750Ti as a replacement considering the driver situation currently.
Back to top
techAdmin
Status: Site Admin
Joined: 26 Sep 2003
Posts: 3986
Location: East Coast, West Coast? I know it's one of them.
Reply Quote
All I can tell you is that nvidia has usually not taken this long to release a new driver version for legacy, so either that legacy series is at end of life, or nvidia is starting to turn down its linux support levels, which may be the case given that desktop linux has lost marketshare over the past 2 years. One notes that adobe gave up, and stopped releasing linux specific flash, and of course, the near bankrupt amd has long since stopped releasing new linux drivers (their last release was 2015-12), while slashing their linux desktop driver programming division.

Personally I think these things all paint the same picture.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24  Next
All times are GMT - 8 Hours