GeForce4 MX 440 Not Supported in Maverick Meerkat 10.10 Upgrade?

[antoinem01]

Might not be perfect but good enough for me:

sudo su to become root
run nvidia-xconfig (this was in: /usr/lib/nvidia-96/bin/nvidia-xconfig)
go into /etc/X11/xorg.conf - I used vi
modify driver from nvidia to nv - in my case this was on line 94
save file
run startx
when ok - reboot machine - should go straight into your x-windows session

Resolution either 1600X1200 or 1400X1050
Screendept 16

Machine is a Dell Latitiude 840C

[ekd]

...
run nvidia-xconfig (this was in: /usr/lib/nvidia-96/bin/nvidia-xconfig)
go into /etc/X11/xorg.conf - I used vi
modify driver from nvidia to nv - in my case this was on line 94
save file
...

This worked out great for me. I have an old MX 440 and just a little change to the driver name is all it took.

THANK YOU

[xingular]

Might not be perfect but good enough for me:

sudo su to become root
run nvidia-xconfig (this was in: /usr/lib/nvidia-96/bin/nvidia-xconfig)
go into /etc/X11/xorg.conf - I used vi
modify driver from nvidia to nv - in my case this was on line 94
save file
run startx
when ok - reboot machine - should go straight into your x-windows session

Resolution either 1600X1200 or 1400X1050
Screendept 16

Machine is a Dell Latitiude 840C

Not working for me GeForce 3 Ti 200
When I run startx I see this:*


Fatal server error:
Server is already active for display 0
If this server is no longer running, remove /tmp/.X0-lock
and start again.


Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support
at http://wiki.x.org
for help.

*ddxSigGiveUp: Closing log



Reboot, and I still haven't desktop effects.

[Yougo]

Not working for me GeForce 3 Ti 200
When I run startx I see this:*


Fatal server error:
Server is already active for display 0
If this server is no longer running, remove /tmp/.X0-lock
and start again.


Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support
at http://wiki.x.org
for help.

*ddxSigGiveUp: Closing log



Reboot, and I still haven't desktop effects.

remove /tmp/.X0-lock ...hmm, could work
rather, you could rename it and put it back if it didn't do the trick

[Slim Odds]

How long do you guys expect ancient hardware to be supported by new OS's?

I have one of these graphics cards in a system at home and that also has an 800MHz Pentium III processor and 768MB of RAM (maxed out). It's still running 8.04.

At some point you have to hang it up and move on.

It's so old that here are the supported Windows OS's:

WHQL-certified for Windows XP, Windows
Me, Windows 2000, Windows NT, and
Windows 98

Here's what you'll see at the bottom of the data sheet for this device:

Registered trademark NVIDIA® Corporation, 2002. 4 x 4 Evo 2 copyright 2001

So I'd highly recommend newer hardware or an older OS.

[LaughingHorse]

How long do you guys expect ancient hardware to be supported by new OS's?

Till the hardware dies. Why throw out a perfectly good working piece of hardware?

Wasn't part of the promise of Linux you could run it on old "obsolete hardware?"

The problem I am experiencing is really weird. Now, sometimes when I boot up, everything seems fine. Other times I get a page full of lines of text and a command prompt.

And everything did work perfectly in Lucid.

A suggestion for any developer of Ubuntu "listening" why not add a routine in upgrades that searches the existing hardware and lets the person upgrading know of potential conflicts before they do the upgrade, and possibly ways to get around it for the time being?

[Slim Odds]

Till the hardware dies. Why throw out a perfectly good working piece of hardware?

Wasn't part of the promise of Linux you could run it on old "obsolete hardware?"

The problem I am experiencing is really weird. Now, sometimes when I boot up, everything seems fine. Other times I get a page full of lines of text and a command prompt.

And everything did work perfectly in Lucid.

A suggestion for any developer of Ubuntu "listening" why not add a routine in upgrades that searches the existing hardware and lets the person upgrading know of potential conflicts before they do the upgrade, and possibly ways to get around it for the time being?

If you want to run on really old hardware, use really old software.

That "promise" that you speak of can only be taken so far. Should 10.10 also have CGA support?

If you like the way that it worked with Lucid, you should keep using Lucid. It's an LTS and that means that you can use it for a long time.

[LaughingHorse]

If you want to run on really old hardware, use really old software.

That "promise" that you speak of can only be taken so far. Should 10.10 also have CGA support?

If you like the way that it worked with Lucid, you should keep using Lucid. It's an LTS and that means that you can use it for a long time.

Yeah, I guess you are right. Every time a new release comes out, I'll go buy a new computer just to keep up.

[mocoloco]

If you want to run on really old hardware, use really old software.

Old software is full of security holes and bugs. The misconception that you must use old software to get the most out of old hardware stems from a proprietary mindset. Eg, if you want to run Windows software on a Pentium II you'll have to use Win98 (setting aside Wine or VM options). The beauty of Linux is you can run new software on old hardware, that's why distros like Puppy are so popular and why there's such an interest in projects like Lubuntu. Especially in less-developed countries where people use "old" stuff in general much longer (computers, cars, appliances, etc).

Anyway, I'm glad to see support is possible. I'll wait for it to come through the repos, for now 2d with the nouveau driver works fine.

[cascade9]

How long do you guys expect ancient hardware to be supported by new OS's?

I have one of these graphics cards in a system at home and that also has an 800MHz Pentium III processor and 768MB of RAM (maxed out). It's still running 8.04.

At some point you have to hang it up and move on.

It's so old that here are the supported Windows OS's:

WHQL-certified for Windows XP, Windows
Me, Windows 2000, Windows NT, and
Windows 98

Here's what you'll see at the bottom of the data sheet for this device:

Registered trademark NVIDIA® Corporation, 2002. 4 x 4 Evo 2 copyright 2001

So I'd highly recommend newer hardware or an older OS.

A MX440 will run in vista, at least (possibly win7 but I havent tried that). With vista, you HAVE to us the built-in vista driver. BTW, the main reason why there is no offical support for the MX440 is because the MX440 is a DX7 card, vista + win7 need a DX9 cards, but vista with a MX440 worked for me (thats also the reason why the 3Ti and 4Ti card dont have offical vista/win7 drivers, they are only DX8 cards)

10.10 would have no problems supporting the 96.xx drivers right now if it was using xorg 1.8.x, and the 96.xx drivers should get a version that works with xorg 1.9 sooner or later.