Page MenuHomeSolus

Update nvidia-glx-driver to 465.24.02
ClosedPublic

Authored by Staudey on Thu, Apr 15, 5:19 PM.

Details

Summary

Update nvidia-glx-driver to 465.24.02

Changelog available here

Test Plan

Rebooted, launched Steam and played the free games "b"(Proton) and "Floating Point"

Diff Detail

Repository
R2210 nvidia-glx-driver
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

Staudey created this revision.Thu, Apr 15, 5:19 PM
Staudey requested review of this revision.Thu, Apr 15, 5:19 PM
JoshStrobl requested changes to this revision.Fri, Apr 16, 1:31 AM
JoshStrobl added a subscriber: JoshStrobl.
JoshStrobl added inline comments.
package.yml
23

Why was this changed? nvidia-glx-driver is for LTS kernel.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Fri, Apr 16, 1:31 AM
Staudey marked an inline comment as done.Fri, Apr 16, 4:42 AM
Staudey added inline comments.
package.yml
23

Because of the confusion it caused for at least one user when the description of the 32bit-package mentioned (LTS kernel), and he couldn't find the (current kernel) version of the 32bit-package (which of course is one and the same). I thought about adding a separate description for the 32bit-package, but then I saw the other driver branches handle it like this (see e.g. nvidia-390-glx)

Staudey requested review of this revision.Fri, Apr 16, 4:42 AM
Staudey marked an inline comment as done.
JoshStrobl requested changes to this revision.Fri, Apr 16, 1:59 PM
JoshStrobl added inline comments.
package.yml
23

Then a summary and description should be added for 32bit subpackage. I do not want people mistaking the main package, which is for LTS, as the normal one for their kernel, when most are running current.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Fri, Apr 16, 1:59 PM
Staudey added inline comments.Fri, Apr 16, 2:48 PM
package.yml
23

Okay, will do so when I get home. I guess I should do the same thing for the nvidia-390 driver too then? (which is currently structured similar to this approach)

JoshStrobl added inline comments.
package.yml
23

Yea that would be ideal. fwiw, both @DataDrake and I have always disagreed with the notion of main being LTS vs having a dedicated -lts sub-package. Not sure if that's something we want to bit the bullet and pull the trigger on yet, but we do tend to circle back to it every once in a while.

Staudey updated this revision to Diff 26149.Fri, Apr 16, 5:13 PM

Restructure descriptions again

Staudey marked 2 inline comments as done.Fri, Apr 16, 5:13 PM
JoshStrobl requested changes to this revision.Sun, Apr 25, 9:38 AM
JoshStrobl added inline comments.
package.yml
27

Needs to be added to summary as well.

This revision now requires changes to proceed.Sun, Apr 25, 9:38 AM
Staudey updated this revision to Diff 26359.Mon, Apr 26, 4:36 PM

Also update summary

Staudey marked an inline comment as done.Mon, Apr 26, 4:37 PM
Staudey added inline comments.
package.yml
27

Okay, done. This should make things even clearer :)

JoshStrobl accepted this revision.Mon, Apr 26, 6:21 PM

Yep, crystal clear now. Thanks!

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Mon, Apr 26, 6:21 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.