NVIDIA Rant. (Reload Prism Launcher) [Solved]

[MXMUX]

I moved from a different distro because I liked the idea of a rolling release. Less work is good, but every time the new release rolls out it breaks Nvidia. The .5 release broke it again and I went through the hoops to fix it again but it breaks again. What I mean by breaking this time is after I fixed it all was fine then on a reboot the display parameters are mess up and I cannot select a different parameter. This time when I revert to nouveau driver it sticks to 3840x2160 and my old eyes (with glasses on) can't see that. Here I go again with a re-install. With a reinstall all goes fine until an Nvidia update and it all goes downhill from there. I am fine with a re-install and wish there was a version of MX that wasn't rolling for this reason. I will look to blacklist nividia and hop this solves my problem. I am not leaving MX, Love their work but this is just an Nvidia rant.

[DukeComposed]

I am fine with a re-install and wish there was a version of MX that wasn't rolling for this reason.

MX Linux isn't a rolling release. Several people like to show up here and complain how much work it is to upgrade from one release of MX to the next. You might want to consider documenting the steps you take to repair your driver issues, and then pin that driver package so that newer versions aren't installed when you patch the machine.

[MXMUX]

[/quote]
MX Linux isn't a rolling release.
[/quote]
How is it I go from 23 to 23.1, .2 .3 .4 5.? Only from the updates? I am not arguing I am asking.

[DukeComposed]

How is it I go from 23 to 23.1, .2 .3 .4 5.? Only from the updates? I am not arguing I am asking.

Those are "minor version" updates that refresh the packages of the OS. If you installed MX-21 you automatically got the MX-21.1 updates when they were made available, and over time MX-21.2, and MX-21.3 updates as well.

You will not, however, get upgraded to MX-23 on that MX-21 machine. Moving from one major release of MX Linux to another is still a manual process and there are plenty of folks on the EOL'd MX-19.4 release today who have never been upgraded to a current version of MX. A rolling release would only offer a continuous stream of minor version updates to every user, every time they checked for patches.

In operating systems a rolling release is a very specific term to describe an OS that never provides major version milestones, and you shouldn't use it to describe a distribution that doesn't, in fact, roll from one release to the next.

Edit: article agreement

[asqwerth]

I moved from a different distro because I liked the idea of a rolling release. Less work is good, but every time the new release rolls out it breaks Nvidia. The .5 release broke it again and I went through the hoops to fix it again but it breaks again. What I mean by breaking this time is after I fixed it all was fine then on a reboot the display parameters are mess up and I cannot select a different parameter. This time when I revert to nouveau driver it sticks to 3840x2160 and my old eyes (with glasses on) can't see that. Here I go again with a re-install. With a reinstall all goes fine until an Nvidia update and it all goes downhill from there. I am fine with a re-install and wish there was a version of MX that wasn't rolling for this reason. I will look to blacklist nividia and hop this solves my problem. I am not leaving MX, Love their work but this is just an Nvidia rant.

MX is not rolling because each major release [MX19, MX21, MX23] is based on a separate Debian release [10, 11, 12], And each release has their own separate repos that will never meet or mingle. If you're on MX21/Debian 11 repos, that's where you will stay, receiving only packages compatible with these 2 releases. That's a fixed release distro. Point releases [23.1, 23.2.....] are still within the boundaries of the same Debian/MX base. Frankly, they are just names given to the latest iso/installable media so you know -- when downloading -- that you are getting the latest iso that has accumulated all the updates to date provided for that Debian/MX base.

Rolling - eg Arch Linux or Void or PCLinuxOS.
They all just have one set of repos, and newer packages just keep getting thrown into the mix of the same old repos, continuously, forever. This can cause conflicts at times, say when some devs are slower to update their packages than the rest of the packages, so it's not moving in step with everything else. And when there are major jumps in versions of certain applications or desktop environment or kernels, things can get a little hairy....

If you think Nvidia is a pain for fixed release distros like MX, wait till you try a rolling one, haha. I have Manjaro installs, and every update time, I check the forums there and there are always issues involving Nvidia. And it's not just because of new kernels being installed; the move from Plasma 5 to 6 was pretty messy for Nvidia users who wanted to use Wayland as well.....

[kc1di]

In any event the suggestion that you pin the Nvidia driver is a good one the other thing that may hinder Nvidia is a kernel update. which means the Nvidia driver may have to be rebuilt against the newer kernel. So sometimes it's a waiting game until everything catches up.
I stay away from Nvidia as much as possible. I'm not a gamer and don't need them. Try to enjoy the journey! :)

[AVLinux]

As someone who has done more than my share of nVidia rants lately, some notes..

There is a sweet spot, nVidia cards that are too old and too new seem to be the most troublesome.. In my opinion serially updating a kernel with blanket upgrades is a bad idea unless there is a known security issue to be addressed.. update your apps, hold a working kernel.. Hardware support and Userspace applications are two separate worlds on a Linux system.. A solid kernel and working Drivers should theoretically last the duration of a 'Stable' Distro.. The Kernel is the core of your system and if you don't know why you're changing it, maybe don't?

Many people think otherwise and fair enough but on a production system I try and leave a working setup be with regard to the Kernel and Video Drivers.

[Stevo]

Debian Stable itself is rollin', rollin', rollin'---it's gone from 12.0 to 12.9! PROOF! Rolling just like my eyes:

I wonder if this was our AHS version where we do have to keep updating Nvidia to build on newer kernels, or the stable one with just Debian packages. We may never know--if only there was an easy way to quickly let us know some system information.

[CharlesV]

@MXMUX Please post your QSI. ( MX Menu, Quick System Info, Copy for Forum, Paste here )

This will help us identify your system and *may* provide someone with the ability to suggest an upgrade strategy for you.

As an nvidia user on production machines, I prefer to do the following if there is a major nvidia update to my system.
1) Timeshift ;-/
2) update *all* drivers as I move forward on the update. (ie kernel's, nvidia, and more. )

I also have found that running Liquorix kernels help stabilize my system, as well as provide me with 'a better linux experience' , and less issues. ( your mileage may very ! but we see liquorix kernels solve issues pretty much every day in the forum. )

[oops]

Debian Stable itself is rollin', rollin', rollin'---it's gone from 12.0 to 12.9! PROOF! Rolling just like my eyes:

I wonder if this was our AHS version where we do have to keep updating Nvidia to build on newer kernels, or the stable one with just Debian packages. We may never know--if only there was an easy way to quickly let us know some system information.

Right, I only consider Debian, MX, antiX, as semi-rolling (stable enough for almost everything, except especially for nvidia for the moment, but the nouveau nvidia kernel module is better and better)