# Nvidia drivers suck.

## Anti-MS

So, I upgraded my kernel (quite the process in itself) and re-emerged nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx.  I restarted and got the nice little familiar login screen.  I then decided to install the necessary components required to create a Linux Wifi hotspot.  (Not really a priority at this point...)  I entered "emerge ipw2200" and it said that I needed to alter some settings in my kernel.  Namely, I should disable kernel wifi support and enable kernel support for the MIC hash algorithm.  I did this, recompiled the kernel, copied the kernel into /boot, and restarted.  As I expected, it complained that it couldn't load the nvidia drivers.  So, I re-emerged them.

This time, it said "FATAL: Error inserting nvidia (/lib/modules/2.6.16-gentoo-r9/video/nvidia.ko): Unknown symbol in module, or unknown parameter (see dmesg)"

Here's the relavent portion of dmesg:

```
nvidia: module license 'NVIDIA' taints kernel.

nvidia: Unknown symbol remap_page_range

nvidia: Unknown symbol pci_find_class
```

So, I tried the newest drivers (1.0.8762) by sticking "media-video/nvidia-kernel ~x86" and "media-video/nvidia-glx ~x86" in my /etc/portage/package.keywords.  That solution didn't work either.  The error message in dmesg was then "NVRM: client does not support versioning!!"

Since then, I've tried the 1.0.7667, 1.0.7676, and 1.0.8174 kernels, all of which gave me a compile error saying that rlim was not a member of some data structure.  (I can most likely recreate the error to give you the exact compile error if absolutely necessary.)

I also tried re-emerging xorg-x11, but that didn't work.

So, finally, I just stuck 'Driver "nv"' in xorg.conf.  However, that gives me only 640x480 resolution.   :Laughing: 

So, needless to say, I really want my nvidia drivers back.  :Razz: 

By the way, on a related topic, I plan to upgrade within about 6 months.  What graphics cards are best supported on Linux?

Thanks again for your help.  You guys have gotten me through several issues already.

----------

## Monkeh

 *Anti-MS wrote:*   

> So, I upgraded my kernel (quite the process in itself)

 

It is? Takes me about five minutes, not including compile time, including rebooting.

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> ```
> nvidia: Unknown symbol remap_page_range
> 
> ...

 

remap_page_range was removed in 2.6.16, so older nVidia drivers will not work. pci_find_class was also removed recently, I think.

 *Quote:*   

> So, I tried the newest drivers (1.0.8762) by sticking "media-video/nvidia-kernel ~x86" and "media-video/nvidia-glx ~x86" in my /etc/portage/package.keywords.  That solution didn't work either.  The error message in dmesg was then "NVRM: client does not support versioning!!"

 

At a guess, disable module versioning.

 *Quote:*   

> By the way, on a related topic, I plan to upgrade within about 6 months.  What graphics cards are best supported on Linux?

 

nVidia ones.

So: Try x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers or x11-drivers/nvidia-legacy-drivers if you have a GeForce2 or older.

----------

## intgr

 *Anti-MS wrote:*   

> What graphics cards are best supported on Linux?

 

From what I've heard, the Radeon 9200 works best with the Free r200 DRI drivers.

See http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon#head-a9fbb782173e9b50a28dd40210b2dda6a1d86c44, section "3D support in Radeons" for details.

But if you're expecting to use some fancier 3D features of newer cards then you're just SoL.

----------

## kEiNsTeiN

friend of mine and me had huge problems getting his ATI card to work, until we found out how-to, or the drivers came to support his chipset. You usually are on the save side with nvidia....

----------

## Anti-MS

 *Monkeh wrote:*   

>  *Anti-MS wrote:*   So, I upgraded my kernel (quite the process in itself) 
> 
> It is? Takes me about five minutes, not including compile time, including rebooting

 

It was this time.  I got kernel panics after the upgrade.

 *Quote:*   

>  *Quote:*   
> 
> ```
> nvidia: Unknown symbol remap_page_range
> 
> ...

 

Ok.  So no 1.0.6627 under 2.6.16.   :Laughing: 

 *Quote:*   

>  *Quote:*   So, I tried the newest drivers (1.0.8762) by sticking "media-video/nvidia-kernel ~x86" and "media-video/nvidia-glx ~x86" in my /etc/portage/package.keywords.  That solution didn't work either.  The error message in dmesg was then "NVRM: client does not support versioning!!" 
> 
> At a guess, disable module versioning

 

Hmm.  Actually, I didn't have module versioning enabled.  I didn't even think to check to see if that was a kernel option.  However, now that I've enabled module versioning, when it tries to load xorg, I just get a blank black screen and am unable to ctrl-alt-fX to any of the consoles.  And, there's no output to the log files whatsoever.  It looks like it froze before it could write to the log file.

 *Quote:*   

>  *Quote:*   By the way, on a related topic, I plan to upgrade within about 6 months.  What graphics cards are best supported on Linux? 
> 
> nVidia ones.

 

Wow.  That sucks.

 *Quote:*   

> So: Try x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers or x11-drivers/nvidia-legacy-drivers if you have a GeForce2 or older.

 

I have a GeForce4.Last edited by Anti-MS on Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:54 pm; edited 1 time in total

----------

## yabbadabbadont

What version of xorg are you using?  There have been quite a few posts of problems with nvidia drivers and the newer(est) xorg release.  Works fine for some and others never get it to work.  Just as a sanity check, you might try using the nv driver to make sure that your X setup is OK.

----------

## Anti-MS

 *yabbadabbadont wrote:*   

> What version of xorg are you using? There have been quite a few posts of problems with nvidia drivers and the newer(est) xorg release. Works fine for some and others never get it to work.

 

I did emerge xorg-x11 just to see if it would work.  (I was desparate.   :Laughing: )

Right now, I'm not at my home computer, but I did emerge --sync recently, and I used the greatest version deemed stable by portage, so according to this site, I'm pretty sure I'm using xorg 7.0-r1.

 *Quote:*   

> Just as a sanity check, you might try using the nv driver to make sure that your X setup is OK.

 

Yup.  Did that:

 *Anti-MS wrote:*   

> So, finally, I just stuck 'Driver "nv"' in xorg.conf. However, that gives me only 640x480 resolution. 

 

X is fine.  Just really really big.   :Razz: 

----------

## dansehl

I had the same prob. I used XOrg latest unmasked. I got the newest binary from NVidia, used their installer - fixed it.

This is as of yesterday.

Hope that helps.

-Dan

----------

## Bobnoxous

I've had better luck with the binary drivers from Nvidia, than the open source ones. I've had some build issues, and when running mythtv, the OS drivers couldn't handle the mpeg video. 

Maybe this has all been resolved now, but I don't have any moral issues with running nvidia's drivers, and they've just worked better for me. If you take this route, don't build the nvidia drivers in your kernel, of course.

----------

## Anti-MS

 *dansehl wrote:*   

> I had the same prob. I used XOrg latest unmasked. I got the newest binary from NVidia, used their installer - fixed it.
> 
> This is as of yesterday.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> ...

 

Are the installers you get from nvidia.com the same as the ones in /usr/portage/distfiles, because I have tried those... several... million... times.

Sorry.  Just a little bit of desparation showing through there...

----------

## PaulBredbury

 *Anti-MS wrote:*   

> Are the installers you get from nvidia.com the same as the ones in /usr/portage/distfiles

 

Yes. So there is no benefit in running nvidia's .run file to install the nvidia drivers manually, unless the ebuilds are broken (in which case lots of Gentoo users would scream).

----------

## Anti-MS

 *PaulBredbury wrote:*   

>  *Anti-MS wrote:*   Are the installers you get from nvidia.com the same as the ones in /usr/portage/distfiles 
> 
> Yes. So there is no benefit in running nvidia's .run file to install the nvidia drivers manually, unless the ebuilds are broken (in which case lots of Gentoo users would scream).

 

Yeah.  I figured that was the case.  Dansehl just mentioned getting the installers from nvidia.  I just couldn't tell if he was implying that the nvidia installers are different or not.

----------

## Ghaleon

 *intgr wrote:*   

>  *Anti-MS wrote:*   What graphics cards are best supported on Linux? 
> 
> From what I've heard, the Radeon 9200 works best with the Free r200 DRI drivers.
> 
> See http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon#head-a9fbb782173e9b50a28dd40210b2dda6a1d86c44, section "3D support in Radeons" for details.
> ...

 

How would one go about obtaining these drivers?

----------

## intgr

 *Ghaleon wrote:*   

> How would one go about obtaining these drivers?

 

*pant* Took me 20 minutes to find, here they are: http://dri.freedesktop.org/snapshots/

I was under the impression that these drivers had a homepage as well, but apparently I was wrong. The closest thing to a homepage is probably http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/

You will also need to enable VIDEO_CARDS="r200" in your make.conf and re-emerge xorg-x11.

Edit: Exposing my limited knowledge on the subject, I'm not even sure if these work with X.org. The xorg-x11 ebuild does not have a VIDEO_CARDS="r200" flag. The driver may have been superseded by the 'radeon' driver that's now available under Direct Rendering Manager in all recent kernels, however the freedesktop.org wiki ATIRadeon page clearly implies that there are two different drivers named 'r200' and 'radeon'.

----------

## Ghaleon

Thanks. I've been trying to get my radeon to work with hardware acceleration.

----------

## Anti-MS

Crap.  So I'm SOL?

----------

## Anti-MS

Any idea how I can get 1024x768 resolution out of the "nv" driver?

Here's the relavent portion of xorg.conf:

```
Section "Device"

    # Insert Clocks lines here if appropriate

    #Driver         "nvidia"

    #Option         "NvAGP" "no"

    Identifier     "GeForce4"

    Driver         "nv"

EndSection

Section "Screen"

    Identifier     "Screen 1"

    Device         "GeForce4"

    Monitor        "Main"

    DefaultDepth    16

    SubSection     "Display"

        Viewport    0 0

        Depth       16

        Modes      "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"

    EndSubSection

    SubSection     "Display"

        Viewport    0 0

        Depth       24

        Modes      "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"

    EndSubSection

EndSection
```

Here's the relavent portion of /var/log/Xorg.0.log:

```
(II) NV: driver for NVIDIA chipsets: RIVA 128, RIVA TNT, RIVA TNT2,

   Unknown TNT2, Vanta, RIVA TNT2 Ultra, RIVA TNT2 Model 64,

   Aladdin TNT2, GeForce 256, GeForce DDR, Quadro, GeForce2 MX/MX 400,

   GeForce2 MX 100/200, GeForce2 Go, Quadro2 MXR/EX/Go,

   GeForce2 Integrated GPU, GeForce2 GTS, GeForce2 Ti, GeForce2 Ultra,

   Quadro2 Pro, GeForce4 MX 460, GeForce4 MX 440, GeForce4 MX 420,

   GeForce4 MX 440-SE, GeForce4 440 Go, GeForce4 420 Go,

   GeForce4 420 Go 32M, GeForce4 460 Go, Quadro4 550 XGL,

   GeForce4 440 Go 64M, Quadro4 NVS, Quadro4 500 GoGL,

   GeForce4 410 Go 16M, GeForce4 MX 440 with AGP8X,

   GeForce4 MX 440SE with AGP8X, GeForce4 MX 420 with AGP8X,

   GeForce4 MX 4000, GeForce4 448 Go, GeForce4 488 Go, Quadro4 580 XGL,

   Quadro4 280 NVS, Quadro4 380 XGL, Quadro NVS 50 PCI, GeForce4 448 Go,

   GeForce4 MX Integrated GPU, GeForce3, GeForce3 Ti 200,

   GeForce3 Ti 500, Quadro DCC, GeForce4 Ti 4600, GeForce4 Ti 4400,

   0x0252, GeForce4 Ti 4200, Quadro4 900 XGL, Quadro4 750 XGL,

   Quadro4 700 XGL, GeForce4 Ti 4800, GeForce4 Ti 4200 with AGP8X,

   GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE, GeForce4 4200 Go, Quadro4 700 GoGL,

   Quadro4 980 XGL, Quadro4 780 XGL, GeForce FX 5800 Ultra,

   GeForce FX 5800, Quadro FX 2000, Quadro FX 1000,

   GeForce FX 5600 Ultra, GeForce FX 5600, 0x0313, GeForce FX 5600SE,

   0x0316, 0x0317, GeForce FX Go5600, GeForce FX Go5650,

   Quadro FX Go700, 0x031D, 0x031E, 0x031F, GeForce FX 5200,

   GeForce FX 5200 Ultra, GeForce FX 5200, GeForce FX 5200SE,

   GeForce FX Go5200, GeForce FX Go5250, GeForce FX 5500,

   GeForce FX 5100, GeForce FX Go5200 32M/64M, 0x0329,

   Quadro NVS 280 PCI, Quadro FX 500/600 PCI, GeForce FX Go53xx Series,

   GeForce FX Go5100, 0x032F, GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, GeForce FX 5900,

   GeForce FX 5900XT, GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, Quadro FX 700,

   GeForce FX 5900ZT, Quadro FX 3000, GeForce FX 5700 Ultra,

   GeForce FX 5700, GeForce FX 5700LE, GeForce FX 5700VE, 0x0345,

   GeForce FX Go5700, GeForce FX Go5700, 0x0349, 0x034B,

   Quadro FX Go1000, Quadro FX 1100, 0x034F, GeForce 6800 Ultra,

   GeForce 6800, GeForce 6800 LE, 0x0043, GeForce 6800 GT, 0x0049,

   Quadro FX 4000, Quadro FX 4400, 0x00C0, 0x00C1, GeForce 6800 LE,

   0x00C8, 0x00C9, 0x00CC, 0x00CE, GeForce 6600 GT, GeForce 6600,

   0x0142, 0x0143, GeForce Go 6600, GeForce 6610 XL,

   GeForce Go 6600 TE/6200 TE, 0x0147, GeForce Go 6600, 0x0149, 0x014B,

   0x014C, 0x014D, Quadro FX 540, GeForce 6200, 0x0160, 0x0166, 0x0210,

   0x0211, 0x021D, 0x021E

.

.

.

(II) NV(0): Initializing int10

(II) NV(0): Primary V_BIOS segment is: 0xc000

(--) NV(0): Chipset: "GeForce4 420 Go"

(**) NV(0): Depth 16, (--) framebuffer bpp 16

(==) NV(0): RGB weight 565

(==) NV(0): Default visual is TrueColor

.

.

.

(==) NV(0): Using HW cursor

(--) NV(0): Linear framebuffer at 0xDC000000

(--) NV(0): MMIO registers at 0xFD000000

.

.

.

(II) NV(0): I2C bus "DDC" initialized.

(II) NV(0): Probing for analog device on output A...

(--) NV(0):   ...can't find one

(II) NV(0): Probing for analog device on output B...

(--) NV(0):   ...can't find one

(II) NV(0): Probing for EDID on I2C bus A...

(II) NV(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0.

(II) NV(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed.

(II) NV(0):   ... none found

(II) NV(0): Probing for EDID on I2C bus B...

(II) NV(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" registered at address 0xA0.

(II) NV(0): I2C device "DDC:ddc2" removed.

(II) NV(0):   ... none found

(--) NV(0): CRTC 1 is currently programmed for DFP

(II) NV(0): Using DFP on CRTC 1

(--) NV(0): Panel size is 1024 x 768

(--) NV(0): VideoRAM: 32768 kBytes

(==) NV(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)

(II) NV(0): Main: Using default hsync range of 28.00-33.00 kHz

(II) NV(0): Main: Using vrefresh range of 50.00-70.00 Hz

(II) NV(0): Clock range:  12.00 to 350.00 MHz

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x350" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x175" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x400" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x200" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "720x400" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "360x200" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x240" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x240" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x240" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "320x240" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "400x300" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "400x300" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "400x300" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "400x300" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "400x300" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "512x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "512x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "512x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "512x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "512x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1152x864" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1152x864" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "576x432" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1280x960" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1280x960" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x480" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1280x960" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1280x960" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x480" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1280x1024" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1280x1024" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x512" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1280x1024" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1280x1024" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x512" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1280x1024" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1280x1024" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "640x512" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1200" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1200" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1200" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1200" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1200" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1200" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1200" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1200" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1200" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1200" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x600" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1792x1344" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1792x1344" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "896x672" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1792x1344" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1792x1344" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "896x672" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1856x1392" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1856x1392" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "928x696" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1856x1392" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1856x1392" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "928x696" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1920x1440" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1920x1440" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "960x720" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1920x1440" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1920x1440" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "960x720" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "832x624" (hsync out of range)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "416x312" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1152x768" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1152x768" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "576x384" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1400x1050" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1400x1050" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "700x525" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1400x1050" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1400x1050" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "700x525" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1600x1024" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1600x1024" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "800x512" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "1920x1440" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1920x1440" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "960x720" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "2048x1536" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "2048x1536" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Mode "2048x1536" is larger than BIOS programmed panel size of 1024 x 768.  Removing.

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "2048x1536" (unknown reason)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "2048x1536" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using default mode "1024x768" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)

(II) NV(0): Not using mode "1024x768" (no mode of this name)

(II) NV(0): Not using mode "800x600" (no mode of this name)

(--) NV(0): Virtual size is 640x480 (pitch 640)

(**) NV(0): *Default mode "640x480": 25.2 MHz, 31.5 kHz, 60.0 Hz

(II) NV(0): Modeline "640x480"   25.20  640 656 752 800  480 490 492 525 -hsync -vsync

(==) NV(0): DPI set to (75, 75)

.

.

.

(==) NV(0): Write-combining range (0xdc000000,0x2000000)

(II) NV(0): Using XFree86 Acceleration Architecture (XAA)

   Screen to screen bit blits

   Solid filled rectangles

   8x8 mono pattern filled rectangles

   Indirect CPU to Screen color expansion

   Solid Lines

   Scanline Image Writes

   Offscreen Pixmaps

   Setting up tile and stipple cache:

      32 128x128 slots

      32 256x256 slots

      16 512x512 slots

(==) NV(0): Backing store disabled

(==) NV(0): Silken mouse enabled
```

I recall getting 1024x768 out of nv in the past, so it should be possible on my setup.

----------

## Anti-MS

Any ideas?  Please?

Hardware 3D acceleration can wait, if it must, but there's very little I wouldn't do right about now for 1024x768 resolution.

----------

## Phenax

Oh, I didn't see your versioning error. I can probably help you fix BOTH of your problems if we can get an IM going on.

AIM: pdoubleopdawg

MSN: toomanynamesaretaken@hotmail.com

IRC: Phenax @ irc.freenode.com

The versioning error is most likely because you have a different kernel in /usr/src/linux than you are using to boot on. Make sure the kernel you are using is the one in /usr/src/linux, and when they match recompile nvidia-drivers.

nvidia-drivers has now taken over nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx, unmerge them and get nvidia-drivers.

Your resolution error may or may not be fixed by going to binary. I can help later if it doesn't work.

----------

## Anti-MS

 *Phenax wrote:*   

> Oh, I didn't see your versioning error. I can probably help you fix BOTH of your problems if we can get an IM going on.
> 
> AIM: pdoubleopdawg
> 
> MSN: toomanynamesaretaken@hotmail.com
> ...

 

Let me try some of the stuff you've mentioned below first.  I'm hoping not to take too much more time with this.  I've got some assignments to get done.

Though, better resolution would help tremendously with my assignements.   :Laughing: 

 *Quote:*   

> The versioning error is most likely because you have a different kernel in /usr/src/linux than you are using to boot on. Make sure the kernel you are using is the one in /usr/src/linux, and when they match recompile nvidia-drivers.

 

Nope.  /usr/src/linux points to /usr/src/linux-2.6.16-gentoo-r9 as it should.

But, at this point, I can't reproduce that error.  However, hopefully nvidia-drivers will work better than nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx.

 *Quote:*   

> nvidia-drivers has now taken over nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx, unmerge them and get nvidia-drivers.

 

Wow!  Well, if I'd have known to try that earlier...   :Laughing: 

That must have been added pretty recently.  I emerge --sync'd just a few days ago, but I don't have nvidia-drivers in /usr/portage/x11-drivers/.  So, right now, I'm syncing again.  Once that's finished, I'll try emerging nvidia-drivers and see what happens.

 *Quote:*   

> Your resolution error may or may not be fixed by going to binary. I can help later if it doesn't work.

 

Thanks!  If I still end up with 640x480 after switching to nvidia-drivers, I'll contact you.   :Very Happy: 

----------

## Phenax

I doubt it's the same version.

Think of it this way.

It wants module versioning. I've checked the source code.

If it wants module versioning, that means that it's detected that the running kernel is different than the kernel found in /usr/src/linux. (Or wherever it detected your kernel!!, maybe problem?)

Module versioning is when you can compile kernel modules for different kernels. Sure, you _Could_ enable it in your kernel and it'd probably work fine if you want to be lazy about it.

Let's put it this way.. Give me the results of

```

ls -l /usr/src | grep 'linux ->'

```

```

uname -sr

```

Do they give you the same version? Also, try unmerging _ALL_ other kernels, and making sure the kernel you use is symlinked to /usr/src/linux.

nvidia-driver will most likely give you the same results as nvidia-kernel with nvidia-glx. It's the same version, and I think they will keep nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx in there.

----------

## Anti-MS

Ok.  I emerge --sync'd and emerge nvidia-drivers'd, and now, when it gives me the "setting up kdm" message on the first console, the screen goes completely black and the entire system becomes completely unresponsive.  Just like I mentioned a few posts ago.

I'm going to contact you (Phenax) via IRC in just a moment.  Give me a minute to wrap some stuff up, though.

edit: You made that post while I was typing this one.

 *Phenax wrote:*   

> I doubt it's the same version.
> 
> Think of it this way.
> 
> It wants module versioning. I've checked the source code.
> ...

 

Ooooookay.  So the "module versioning" option in the kernel is not what I want.   :Laughing: 

Do you think disabling it would be prudent?

 *Quote:*   

> Let's put it this way.. Give me the results of
> 
> ```
> 
> ls -l /usr/src | grep 'linux ->'
> ...

 

Yes.  I'm running 2.6.16-gentoo-r9 according to uname -sr, and ls -l /usr/src | grep 'linux ->' gives me:

```
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root   22 Jul 14 15:48 linux -> linux-2.6.16-gentoo-r9
```

 *Quote:*   

> Also, try unmerging _ALL_ other kernels, and making sure the kernel you use is symlinked to /usr/src/linux.

 

Er...  That sounds... like a bad idea.

If I unmerge the 2.6.14-gentoo-r5 kernel, I won't have anything to fall back on should I be unable to properly boot the 2.6.16-gentoo-r9 kernel.

I suppose I could use a knoppix cd... if I could find it.   :Laughing: 

 *Quote:*   

> nvidia-driver will most likely give you the same results as nvidia-kernel with nvidia-glx. It's the same version, and I think they will keep nvidia-kernel and nvidia-glx in there.

 

Yup.  I found that out the hard way.   :Laughing: 

I'm beginning to think realtime would be much easier than this.  I'll contact you via IRC.Last edited by Anti-MS on Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:10 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## Phenax

Alright then, I was off IRC for a bit but I just got back on.

----------

## Anti-MS

Dang it.  I've got some pressing obligations.  I'll be back in a little while.  Should be less than half an hour.  If you're unable to help me in realtime by then, don't worry about it.

Thanks again.   :Very Happy: 

----------

## Phenax

I'm a student on Summer break. I got nothing to do all day.

I'll most likely be on IRC still, if I don't reply that's because I'm playing Quake and I'll most likely reply shortly.   :Razz: 

----------

## Anti-MS

 *Phenax wrote:*   

> I'm a student on Summer break. I got nothing to do all day.

 

Yeah.  I had to take a Summer class this time.   :Mad:   Oh well.

Edit:  I've sent you a couple of messages via IRC at Phenax @ irc.freenode.com

----------

## Anti-MS

I've got to go for tonight.  I'll see you later.   :Smile: 

Thanks for your help so far.

----------

## Anti-MS

Any more ideas?  I doubt I can do any realtime chat before the end of the summer semester in two weeks, so posts will probably have to do.

----------

## FcukThisGame

Having tried both, I've found that nVidia cards are FAR easier to configure than ATI cards.

[url=

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/nvidia-guide.xml]maybe this helps[/url]

or this

----------

## Anti-MS

 *FcukThisGame wrote:*   

> or this

 

Hey!  Check this out:

 *Gentoo-Wiki.com wrote:*   

> Black/Blank screen when starting X
> 
> Symptoms: A black/blank screen when X starts, followed by the monitor going in standby mode after a moment. Ctrl+Alt+Backspace doesn't kill X and get you back to the console. Problem: This issue is caused by bad refresh rate values given to X in your xorg.conf config file.
> 
> In order to fix this, you will need to find the correct HorizSync and VertRefresh values for your monitor. Here's a list of values that did NOT work for me:
> ...

 

I'm going to boot into Knoppix and see what refresh rates it generates.

Thanks for the link!

I'll report on my success or lack thereof in a moment.

----------

## Anti-MS

Well, I haven't found a working refresh rate yet, but I still have a few to try.

I tried to find a working xorg.conf online from another Toshiba Satellite Pro M15-S405, but I haven't had any luck with that yet.

----------

## Anti-MS

Hmm.  I tried the "HorizSync 28-64/VertRefresh 43-60" setup listed in that guide, and it didn't fix my nvidia drivers, but I decided to give up and changed back to the nv driver.  When I restarted, it gave me 1024x768 mode on the nv driver.

I'd still like hardware 3D acceleration (I'm starting to experience some Nexuiz withdrawl.   :Laughing: ) but it can wait until this summer semester is done.

If I find a solution for hardware acceleration before then, I'll post and add (solved) to the title.  If not, I may revive the thread after the semester is over, if that's alright.  Of course, if anybody has any ideas where I might get a working xorg.conf, please let me know.  I'll try to check this thread regularly.

Thank you guys very much for your help so far.  I'll see you guys again soon.   :Very Happy: 

----------

## gnomen

I have been struggling with the same driver problem for a couple of days. Doing 

```
env-update && source /etc/profile && emerge nvidia-drivers
```

again and again and again until in compiled fine did the trick last time. But not this time. Doing as dansehl recommended, that is using the nvidia installer from nvidia.com, worked just fine. Thanks

----------

## figueroa

Today I did an emerge --sync, tried to emerge nvidia-drivers but was told they were ~x86.  So, I added them to my /etc/portage/package.keywords, emerged them, after unmerging nvidia-kernel and nvidial-glx.

I then reset my xorg.conf back to the sync parameters before I upgraded the kernel and voila, it works.  Only problem was KDE desktop fonts were way too large.  I made everything smaller by about 2-3 points and it's working.

Is it possible this is solved?

Afterthought:

It seems to me irresponsible on the part of those managing this show to release as stable a kernel that won't work with stable mainstream video drivers without as much as a warning.  This shouldn't be so difficult.

----------

## Anti-MS

 *gnomen wrote:*   

> I have been struggling with the same driver problem for a couple of days. Doing 
> 
> ```
> env-update && source /etc/profile && emerge nvidia-drivers
> ```
> ...

 

Oh, you had the unknown symbol errors?

(I listed several different errors.  Just wondering which one you solved using that method.)

----------

