4 ms·
No, that's a copyright violation, and it won't run on AMD or Intel GPUs, or kernels with a different Nvidia driver version.
by direwolf20 10mo ago
No, that's a copyright violation, and it won't run on AMD or Intel GPUs, or kernels with a different Nvidia driver version.
- amelius 10mo agoBut this ruins the entire idea of packaging software in a self-contained way, at least for a large class of programs. It makes me wonder, does the OS still take its job of hardware abstraction seriously these days?
- holowoodman 10mo agoThe OS does. Nvidia doesn't.
- direwolf20 10mo agoDoes Nvidia not support OpenGL?
- holowoodman 10mo agoNot really. Nvidia-OpenGL is incompatible to all existing OS OpenGL interfaces, so you need to ship a separate libGL.so if you want to run on Nvidia. In some cases you even need separate binaries, because if you dynamically link against Nvidia's libGL.so, it won't run with any other libGL.so. Sometimes also vice versa.
- direwolf20 10mo agoDoes AMD use a statically linked OpenGL?
- holowoodman 10mo agoAMD uses the dynamically linked system libGL.so, usually Mesa.
- direwolf20 10mo agoSo you still need dynamic linking to load the right driver for your graphics card.
- holowoodman 10mo agoMost stuff like that uses some kind of "icd" mechanism that does 'dlopen' on the vendor-specific parts of the library. Afaik neither OpenGL nor Vulkan nor OpenCL are usable without at least dlopen, if not full dynamic linking.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- direwolf20 10mo agoIt does, and one way it does that is by dynamically loading the right driver code for your hardware.
- maccard 10mo agoThat’s a licensing problem not a packaging problem. A DLL is a DLL - only thing that changes is whether you’re allowed redistribute it