I’ve been having issues with my xorg.conf lately but now everything is fine, but when my computer booted today… well… I can literally see behind the GUI. I have a cursor blinking and moving where tint2 should be while i’m typing here. Sometimes the first quarter of the screen dissapears and gives me a look into that tty something… things come back as the mouse gets in the area. It’s quite interesting.
Alt-F2 knocks out my screen for a second completely. Probably some graphics issue i ran into twice in 2 weeks. So not an issue after reboot. Just curious, anyone else?
The simplest way to fix this without having to write plugins might be to just give you a button to click on ? Is there anything else we need besides code ? I know people here like to edit manually over using GUIs but it would still at least work and wouldn’t confuse everyone who just signed up.
I used to be on something a little less performant a year ago and running CrunchBang. Someone mentioned Elementary - Freya is totally out of the question, it barely runs on 1GB DDR3.
I don’t think another 512k stick is worth it. Just go with the right software, midori, abiword, etc.
PS. I have no idea why I can’t edit my posts, but hey…
I mean to clarifiy, that if the search results for my GPU are totally useless, why would I trust that selecting my card somewhere on a page that is supposed to give you your driver for download is the ultimate answer, especially if the driver looks old being called 304 instead of 352 ?
Where on earth
With that said, according to Nvidia’s site. The driver recommended for your card is
Release Date: 2014.12.5
Where on earth does Nvidia’s site recommend a driver for my card ? I tried searching their site it returns nothing useful.
They indeed recommend something named "Linux x64 (AMD64/EM64T) Display Driver " if you go and try downloading drivers. But who does that given that you have repos ? As a linux user I’m not downloading drivers, I use pacman.
They indeed give you a long list of “Supported Products” where my product pops up too. Why on earth wouldn’t I presume that that list is an accumulation of all previous products ? I indeed didn’t check that list for newer drivers but why would I ? I didn’t even know what my graphics are in the first place.
“Supported products” isn’t saying “This driver is the only one supporting the following products” or “Exclusively supported products”. Nowhere do I read: “caution, we’re dropping support in future versions”.
Then there’s a section with “additional information”:
Note that the list of supported GPU products is provided to indicate which GPUs are supported by a particular driver version.
Was I supposed to infer that doesn’t mean other driver versions don’t support them ? Sure, the older ones might not. But why wouldn’t newer ones ?
They go on saying that:
Some designs incorporating supported GPUs may not be compatible with the NVIDIA Linux driver: in particular, notebook and all-in-one desktop designs with switchable (hybrid) or Optimus graphics will not work if means to disable the integrated graphics in hardware are not available. Hardware designs will vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, so please consult with a system’s manufacturer to determine whether that particular system is compatible.
There is absolutely nothing recommending this version as being the only version that works Given the long list of supported products, one would think they just role support for every new product into a newer version of the driver.
I have an issue, I’m trying to fix it, will I try to install an old buggy driver or wouldn’t it make more sense to try the newest ?
The whole thing is upside down. You would think a company this big has the resourses to place some sense on their pages, but they don’t.
Alright so after scratching my head a lot, I took another look at the log file.
cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log.old | grep -A5 -B2 304
[ 8557.136] (II) Module “ramdac” already built-in
[ 8557.138] (WW) NVIDIA(0): The NVIDIA GeForce 7025 / nForce 630a GPU installed in this
[ 8557.139] (WW) NVIDIA(0): system is supported through the NVIDIA 304.xx Legacy
[ 8557.139] (WW) NVIDIA(0): drivers. Please visit
[ 8557.139] (WW) NVIDIA(0): http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix.html for more
[ 8557.139] (WW) NVIDIA(0): information. The 352.09 NVIDIA driver will ignore this
[ 8557.139] (WW) NVIDIA(0): GPU. Continuing probe…
[ 8557.139] (EE) No devices detected.
After reading this I installed 304.xx Legacy instead (Thanks to Murphy’s law, I tried all the others first of course.), ran nvidia-xconfig and now I have a resolution suited for 19" monitor on a 22", but I can change that from the now functional nvidia-settings.
Aparently the 352.09 driver is stupider than the 304. Which is totally counter intuitive. If my GPU needs a certain flavor of the driver it should be differentiated differently. How on earth does this make sense ?
If 304 is the first version that started supporting this GPU, Whatever comes after 304 should be less buggy and more capable to handle it, not the other way around. I swear I should sue.
So no one in the entire Antergos comunity can see that in my original post I’m already talking about trying an older version ? I mean, I actually thought it would be something like this, but apparently i didn’t go old enough. Why didn’t anyone just say: “look, the numbers are there to fool you, you really need the right driver” ?
The original title was “I ‘broked’ my system”, a word-play on “bricked”. So while someone took the time and edited the title, I’m still on 640x480 since a week.
There must be someone out there somewhere that can fix this, cause all my searches seem to return are unsolved topics from 9 years ago and other things that turn out to be unhelpful.
After I don’t know how many days of 640X480, I removed the driver. I don’t get why a system is able to automatically detect and set the correct resolution during instalation, but somehow it’s unable to just fix itself on a running system, cause I’m still there.
I also don’t get where others find the necessary info to fix this, cause I’ve been looking and just ended up wasting time.
I’m not even sure how to read this silence, it’s either I ran into a bug, failed to see the obvious in the wiki or there’s something wrong with my machine and it takes some unusaual effort to fix it.