desktop-packages team mailing list archive

[KennoVO <ubuntu@xxxxxxxxx>]

The Optimus issue most definitely must be filed as a separate bug (and
comments on it go there). In order for a bug tracking system like this
to work well, the technical scope of a bug must be narrowly defined;
that's software development good practice 101. If the scope of a bug is
vague or allowed to creep, no developer will touch the "assign to me"
button with a 10-foot pole. In fact, this is exactly the reason why
lp:1268257 has been sitting there for 18 months without any progress;
the error description consisted of a *symptom* that could have a very
large number of causes, so nobody was willing to go look into all of
them. It was only after it was realized that lp:1431753 was the cause in
the vast majority of cases that things started moving. In this context,
kudos go to teo1978 for forcing the breakthrough by finding and applying
a workaround for lp:1450251 . You guys have to forgive him for being a
bit testy. Even the most patient person would throw a fit after waiting
18 moths for a trivial-looking fix to a bug that made thousands of users
lose their GUI every few weeks, and then getting another show-stopping
problem when applying that fix!

Anyhow, the scope of *this* bug is the DKMS violation, which is fully
fixed. From a *technical* perspective, the Optimus issue is an entirely
unrelated bug. The fact that it's triggered by the present fix does not
matter a this stage.

<slightly offtopic>Just to set the record straight (you might want to use part of this in the description of the new bug): there are (at least) 2 separate ways to get Optimus support working in Ubuntu:
(1) nvidia-prime : allows you to switch between running the whole desktop on Intel or Nvidia. The choice is made in the nvidia control panel and takes effect when logging out and back in. It's far from a perfect solution but at least it's easy to use.
(2) bumblebee : allows you to specify on which card to run a given program at the command-line (or by editing the application launcher). I personally prefer this route because it gives me more granular control and doesn't force you to log out, but novice users may find it cumbersome.
It appears that the configuration files of the packages that are involved in both (1) and (2) did not anticipate drivers newer than 331 to be used with 14.04, resulting in a blank screen upon login. The fix for (1) is in Anna's link: http://vxlabs.com/2015/02/05/solving-the-ubuntu-14-04-nvidia-346-nvidia-prime-black-screen-issue/ . As for (2), see my post: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-340-updates/+bug/1431753/comments/62 .
Now, if canonical was really serious about LTS, they would have a sufficiently large and professional team working on this. The person responsible for the nvidia driver would have remembered to contacted the people responsible for the gpu-manager and bumblebee packages, or at the very least have been reminded of it by my post, which I made when the fix was still in the "proposed" stage. The actual release of the fix would have been delayed while those other developers would be updating the configuration files of their respective packages (that's, like, less than an hour of work), and the updates would need another round of testing. After 18 months, nobody would have cared about those few days, and it would have prevented the present outpouring of disappointment.</slightly offtopic>

<very much offtopic rant>And yes, there is a lesson to be learned here.
It is becoming increasingly clear that Ubuntu Mobile, much like Windows
Mobile, will never compete with the 800-pound gorillas Android and iOS
on the mobile platform, and all efforts in that direction are an utter
waste. Also, thinking that the desktop will go away is naive; desktops
will continue being the platform of choice in the workplace (as well as
the enthusiast's basement) for the foreseeable future. Therefore,
Canonical should go back to doing what it did best: pushing Linux into
the desktop market. And since IT managers generally don't want to
upgrade all systems every 6 months. LTS support deserves far more love
than it's currently getting.

Windows 10's retreat to the desktop metaphor was largely driven by the
realization that the desktop market is firmly shifting into the domain
of professionals (and enthusiasts), who are not well-served with bells
and whistles, frequent breakage and a dumbed-down interface. How long
will it take until Shuttleworth gets the memo?</very much offtopic rant>

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Desktop
Packages, which is subscribed to nvidia-graphics-drivers-331 in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1431753

Title:
  Nvidia binary driver FTBS due to DKMS layer violation

Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-331 package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-331-updates package in Ubuntu:
  Invalid
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-340-updates package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-346 package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-346-updates package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-331 source package in Trusty:
  Invalid
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-331-updates source package in Trusty:
  Invalid
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-340 source package in Trusty:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-340-updates source package in Trusty:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-346 source package in Trusty:
  Fix Released
Status in nvidia-graphics-drivers-346-updates source package in Trusty:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  Filing this against the 340-updates version but possibly the same
  applies to older versions, too. The nvidia source package produces two
  individual dkms packages: nvidia-340-updates, nvidia-340-updates-uvm.
  The problem is that the DKMS build of the nvidia-uvm module runs
  compile steps inside the nvidia modules build directory. This is
  violating the DKMS assumption that each module can be build
  independently (there is no way of describing cross-modules
  dependencies and even more important, the autoinstall step after a new
  kernel is installed will run the modules build in parallel).

  Since nvidia and nvidia-uvm are very dependent on each other the right
  course of action seems to be to combine both sources in one DKMS
  module that produces two kernel modules (this is supported by DKMS).
  For the transition this resulting dkms package needs to have a
  breaks/replaces for the nvidia-uvm package.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nvidia-graphics-drivers-331/+bug/1431753/+subscriptions