On Tuesday 23 Nov 2004 14:13, Alexander Volovics wrote: > On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 01:01:17PM +0000, Colin J Thomson wrote: > > > >> > Is it still necessary to remove the (xorg-x11) Mesa-libGL and > > > >> > Mesa-libGLU rpm's before installing the nvidia driver. > > > >> > > > >> The NVidia driver package comes with it's own GL libraries. I would > > > >> physically uninstall the Mesa-libGL RPM. > > > > I find this interesting, I have never had to remove *any* libGL rpm to > > get nvidia's driver to run on my system rh8/fc1/2 and the driver seems to > > do a good job backing up the original libGL files.. > > Indeed the nvidia driver install in the past (and presumably now too) > did(does) a good job of removing/backing up the original libGl files. > > But I asked the question because I seem to remember that about > a year (or longer ?) ago (FC1/FC2) there were problems with this and > advice was given on the lists to first remove the original libGl files > first. You did thats right, but I was curious as to why I had *never* had to remove Mesa-libGL, from my early Redhat 8 days and now FC2 For a test today I started from scratch and the nVidia installer never complained at all tested with 6111 and 6629. I will scan the archives on this subj as it interests me. > (But now I have 'ugly' font rendering with the nv driver on an > LCD DVI flatpanel and I would like to see if the nvidia driver does > any better). I guess that question is for a new Thread ;) Cheers, Colin -- Fedora Core 2, Custom Built Kernel 2.6.9-ck3 KDE-Redhat-3.3.1-4.1.2.kde Registered Linux user number #342953
