| 1 |
On Saturday 24 December 2005 13:50, Peter wrote: |
| 2 |
> Also, I find it absolutely fascinating that the only people against this |
| 3 |
> concept are devs, and the only people for it are users. Remember that |
| 4 |
> users are your customers. Every effort should be made to keep them happy. |
| 5 |
Considering that we aren't paid, I think that every _affordable_ effort should |
| 6 |
be made, but making more complex maintainership for devs just to satisfy a |
| 7 |
couple of users, when the advantages are really minimal, it's not exactly a |
| 8 |
good choice, IMHO. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Here, with the unified nvidia, the intent was to REDUCE ebuilds and |
| 11 |
> simplify installation process. I thought the recommendation of a meta |
| 12 |
> nvidia ebuild is a worthy one worth consideration. |
| 13 |
nvidia-glx depends on nvidia-kernel already, no? That would be enough, for me. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> nVidia upstream combines all the products together |
| 16 |
> in their .run files. There is minimal time difference between having the |
| 17 |
> entire suite installed versus each one individually. |
| 18 |
Well depends how you see it. |
| 19 |
If you just build it when you update the drivers, yeah there's a minimal |
| 20 |
difference. |
| 21 |
But if you have more than one kernel (for whatever reason), and you want to |
| 22 |
have the latest kernel on all of them, it's way faster to just use |
| 23 |
nvidia-kernel. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Then there's the point I've already said, about mixing the kernel-level with |
| 26 |
generic userland stuff: for Gentoo/FreeBSD I need it to be split, or I'd have |
| 27 |
to recreate a copy ebuild especially for FBSD... and that not only sucks from |
| 28 |
an user POV but also from a maintenance POV. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ |
| 32 |
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |
Archives