[elrepo] NVIDIA and RHEL 6.5 issue (libglamoregl)

[Phil Perry]

On 30/11/13 19:17, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
> On 11/30/2013 03:30 PM, Phil Perry wrote:
>>
>> I'd like to hear input from package users on their thoughts on the above.
>>
> ... leaving aside that non-suspecting users will panic seeing
> "xorg-x11-drivers " as recommended for erasure ( most people have no
> idea that it's just a meta-package requiring all the drivers ) I am torn
> between two problems:
> - I'd rather add a "Conflicts:" in nvidia-X11-drv. Simply recommending
> the removal of xorg-x11-glamor won't fly for a simple reason: in real
> life, no one reads the docs :) unless they are forced to
> - on the other hand, this approach will prohibit simultaneous
> installation of both NVidia and ATI drivers. Believe it or not, I did
> have cases ( rare, but they existed) when I relocated a hard disk
> between a PC with one type of card to one with the other. Or simply
> replaced the video card. Being able to just change the config file for X
> and have a functional system was a nice feature.
>      Whatever the chosen approach is, we will need to add a README in
> the nvidia-x11-drv package, explaining the issue.
>

Thanks Wolfy - that is one scenario I had not thought of.

Another to consider is that other Xorg drivers will no doubt in time 
also use Glamor, so adding a Conflicts now will most likely create 
additional yum warnings (conflicts) down the line. Further, if/when the 
Intel driver uses glamor then this would crate issues for those with 
Optimus hardware configurations (both Intel and nvidia hardware present).

Thus I'm now thinking this is not a problem we should be looking to 
solve with (brute force) packaging techniques but is rather an Xorg 
configuration issue that each user must address when configuring Xorg 
for their system.

So at this point I'm minded to do nothing other than document the issue 
and suggest users disable glamor as they see fit, unless anyone can 
convince me otherwise.