Problem installing the "nouveau" driver

alupu at verizon.net alupu at verizon.net
Wed Jun 30 18:46:02 PDT 2010


Simon, Trent, Mike:

Thank you very much for the rich, detailed, interesting
theories and explanations about video drivers, booting,
X, fonts, pixels, my boot-up component steps, etc.
All this knowledge and experience is obviously worth a
thread of its own, something I'd be following keenly.

BUT here, as I said very clearly (hopefully) in my last
post, ALL I'm interested in - for the moment - is someone
who HAS "nouveau" active on the machine and has a boot-up
experience different than mine (or even identical -
the point is to compare notes and for me to "steal" a few
ideas :):

<<
Alex (on Jun 29 at 11:26:13 AM)

With "nouveau", my boot-up goes through these basic steps:

1. The original/"regular" console sequence (80x25)
2. Nouveau is loaded by UDEV
3. At this point, the console goes blank for a sec or so.
The preceding messages are wiped out.
4. The remainder of the boot-up sequence proceeds and stays
in 240x67 all the way to the prompt (and beyond).
5. I can never change the 240x67 resolution of the console
text mode.

QUESTION
Does anybody have/see a different behavior?
>>

I also appended a Note, not for people to start a dissertation
on X (educational as it may be), etc., but maybe to deconfuse
some "nouveau" people who might feel they differ with me on
4 and 5 above, just because they by-pass the text console
on their way to graphics bliss.

--- THAT'S ALL ------

As a reminder, to me the overriding element in this "debate"
is the last two-line E-mail from Stephane
(Alex on Jun 28 02:39:05 PM):

> Alex: Is it possible at all?
Stephane: No.

---

If you exit X (i.e. graphics mode) to console, you're back to 
where you'd have started in the first place, still trapped in
nouveau "text mode", in my case 240x67.
Note:  I'm obviously not privy to the inner working of "nouveau",
but I can suspect some people may be trapped in a different
text resolution, probably depending on their monitor.

However, one of my basic principle in life has always been to adhere,
like many others, to the well known dictum,
"Do not believe in miracles -- rely on them".

I tend to believe Stephane, for no other reason than the fact that
_he_ wrote "nouveau".  Thus IMHO (and experience), his "No" also
implies that "you can run (into X and use any resolution you want)
but when you exit you can't hide (you're still mine, in 240x67).

So this is why, hope against hope, maybe, somehow, someday
I'd come across somebody who managed to escape Stephane's
seemingly impenetrable enclosure in the _real_, "nouveau" life!
Again, NOT in theory.
And I understend, say, 80x25 can be (surprize, surprize) in monitor _pixels_.

Thanks

---------------------------------------------------------------
In what follows, just a few loose ends I'd like to tie,

Jun 30, 2010 05:28:36 AM Simon wrote

Alex said:
> BTW, the _exact_ steps of how to set a font in kernel which
> would take effect after "nouveau" is up, will be highly appreciated.

Simon:
I've not tried it myself, but take a look in menuconfig under
"Device Drivers" -> "Graphics Support" ->
"Console display driver support" -> "Select compiled-in fonts".
I think that if you pick something like "VGA 8x16", you'll get
something like what you want. But like I said, I've not tried it.

Alex:  Thank you but if you take another look at one of my configs,

# Console display driver support

CONFIG_FONT_8x8=y
CONFIG_FONT_8x16=y
CONFIG_FONT_7x14=y
CONFIG_FONT_10x18=y

Another guiding principle of mine (to have them there - the day
might come where you need them).
However, I don't see it having any effect on this case
(what with "... kernel vga= ...", or not) once "nouveau" takes over.

---

Something I forgot.
I did have the presence of mind once to postpone the inevitable and
blacklist the "nouveau".  I enjoyed the 80x25 for hours on end.
Disappointingly, once I went to X and back, I was dropped in 240x67 forever.
(on its way to graphics, "nouveau" loads itseld up.)

Just to repeat(?).  I'm NOT against 240x67 (or even 241x66).
It's just that:
1.  I like 80x25, especially for (B)LFS work and in decades of use.
2.  I don't like the government to tell me what's good for me.
I like freedom and choice.  Change scares me, no matter how obviously
good it is for me (and my family).  So I elect 80x25, idiotic as
it might be at this day and age.
3. I used the word "trap".  I understand for some people it can be a
"tender" trap.  People are different.  So be it.

Note:  This is to avoid silly comments like "what's wrong with 240x67?"
and NOT (I emphasize NOT) for us to get sidetracked from answering
MY main question above.  Flames and explanations are for another thread.
Just stick to my original question, to the letter, here.

Thanks again,
-- Alex



More information about the lfs-support mailing list