Any fellow Linux users on here?

[Outdated]

Is this the correct way to blacklist this driver? (I've blacklisted stuff before.)

1) Create a file in /usr/lib/modprobe.d named "blacklist-nvidia-nouveau.conf".
2) Then add the following contents inside this file:

blacklist nouveau
options nouveau modeset=0

Then go to the terminal to update the kernel with the following command:

sudo update-initramfs -u

Yes, that's correct. And yes you can delete the file you made and update initramfs again if it doesn't achieve any meaningful results.

And you're probably like me and just using a text editor to create that file instead of using a terminal like they tell you to. That's fine, I think it's better to do things in a way that makes easy sense and displays visual results.

 

[Judge]

Yes, that's correct. And yes you can delete the file you made and update initramfs again if it doesn't achieve any meaningful results.

And you're probably like me and just using a text editor to create that file instead of using a terminal like they tell you to. That's fine, I think it's better to do things in a way that makes easy sense and displays visual results.

Thanks. And yes, I rarely use the terminal to create such a file.

I use the terminal, but I don't worship it.

 

[Outdated]

I use the terminal, but I don't worship it.

It does make some things easier but it can also cause confusion because in a way you're operating "blind". If I used a terminal to create that file I'd immediately be using my file browser to check the results, why not just use the file browser in the first place?

 

[Judge]

It does make some things easier but it can also cause confusion because in a way you're operating "blind". If I used a terminal to create that file I'd immediately be using my file browser to check the results, why not just use the file browser in the first place?

Same process I use when altering my "GRUB" file in Mint 22.0. Make the changes first in the file manager (Nemo with root authority) and then go to the terminal to finalize it with sudo update-grub.

If I make a typo error in the terminal, my first response is to grimace, not knowing if it's no big deal or something else. If I make it using the file manager, I just fix it. No harm, no foul.

 

[Outdated]

Same process I use when altering my "GRUB" file in Mint 22.0. Make the changes first in the file manager (Nemo with root authority) and then go to the terminal to finalize it with sudo update-grub.

It's a long time since I played with Grub but that's exactly how I did it too. Plus sometimes it's fun and educational to browse and see what else is in there.

 

[Judge]

It's a long time since I played with Grub but that's exactly how I did it too. Plus sometimes it's fun and educational to browse and see what else is in there.

Reminds me of one thing I don't like about Pop!OS22.04 using UEFI.

It has no grub file. At least not in its default folder.

(However non-UEFI bios will generate the grub file in the "etc" default folder.) Go figure...

A big difference between this computer and the last one, that the my last system I had set on "legacy bios"- not UEFI.

 

[Outdated]

Reminds me of one thing I don't like about Pop!OS22.04 using UEFI.

It has no grub file. At least no in its' default folder.

Of course it has a grub file. It's actually a separate partition but in my system it shows up in the regular file list under Boot.

 

[Judge]

Of course it has a grub file. It's actually a separate partition but in my system it shows up in the regular file list under Boot.

View attachment 135910

But can you physically access and modify it?

My understanding is that Pop!OS22.04 using UEFI uses a "systemd-boot default boot-loader"; not a grub to launch the OS. Distinctly different from both Ubuntu- and Mint.

 

[Outdated]

But can you physically access and modify it? I don't know if you can with Pop!OS. using UEFI.

Yes, I can access and modify using the browser just like you did for modprobe.

It's actually easier to do it through the browser because as I mentioned, it's really a separate partition called boot. Accessing things like that in a terminal is really confusing unless you're used to doing things that way all the time.

 

[Outdated]

My understanding is that Pop!OS22.04 using UEFI uses a "systemd-boot default boot-loader"; not a grub to launch the OS.

That explains that then.

There used to be two mainstream boot loaders years ago but the other one fell out of favour, I struggle to remember the name now. Lilo? Something like that. So maybe PoP went in another direction there.

UEFI boot requires the initial boot files to be in a separate partition on the beginning of the drive named boot.

 

[Judge]

That explains that then.

There used to be two mainstream boot loaders years ago but the other one fell out of favour, I struggle to remember the name now. Lilo? Something like that. So maybe PoP went in another direction there.

UEFI boot requires the initial boot files to be in a separate partition on the beginning of the drive named boot.

Yes, when I first installed Pop!OS22.04 on my legacy boot system, it indeed had the same grub file in the default folder in etc. However when I switched it to UEFI my grub file vanished.

 

[Outdated]

Here's a screengrab from the Disks program, note the little FAT partition at the beginning of the drive. That's where the boot files are regardless of what boot loader you're using.

 

[Judge]

Here's a screengrab from the Disks program, note the little FAT partition at the beginning of the drive. That's where the boot files are regardless of what boot loader you're using.

View attachment 135912

Oh...lol that's a partition I'm very well aware of. Mostly because Pop!OS adds more partitions than I like. Pop!OS seems to like "swap" partitions I don't perceive to want- or need.

But the good news is in any case I never had a need to make such a modification in Pop!OS22.04 like I have in multiple versions of Linux Mint. Though Linux Mint 22 UEFI only requires two partitions.

 

[Outdated]

But the good news is in any case I never had a need to make such a modification in Pop!OS22.04 like I have in multiple versions of Linux Mint.

I haven't had to mess with that since SSDs started becoming popular, they didn't load like normal drives at first and you had to be prepared to muck around to get them to initialise. So much easier now.

 

[Outdated]

Pop!OS seems to like "swap" partitions I don't perceive to want- or need.

Fedora does that too, by default you end up with about 5 partitions, your home folder being a separate partition as well.

I imagine a swap file would be useful if you had a very small amount of ram, but in the last 15 years I've never seen my setups use even a single byte of the swap file.

 

[Judge]

Fedora does that too, by default you end up with about 5 partitions, your home folder being a separate partition as well.

I imagine a swap file would be useful if you had a very small amount of ram, but in the last 15 years I've never seen my setups use even a single byte of the swap file.

View attachment 135914

I have 32 GB of memory. I don't need those damn swap files and their partitions. It has no impact on performance, but it seems like it's just cluttering up my SSD. I just wish it could be an option.

 

[Outdated]

I have 32 GB of memory. I don't need those damn swap files and their partitions. It has no impact on performance, but it seems like it's just cluttering up my SSD. I just wish it could be an option.

You could probably configure to run without a swap file but it's such a small amount of space these days that I just ignore it. 15 years ago the default setting was to generate a swap file twice the size of how much ram you have, that was just silly.

 

[Judge]

You could probably configure to run without a swap file but it's such a small amount of space these days that I just ignore it. 15 years ago the default setting was to generate a swap file twice the size of how much ram you have, that was just silly.

I just try to ignore it, other than to know it's a stupid waste of my drive space. Has no effect on the OS. Though it may be their way of reaching out to that portion of the audience with the oldest hardware platforms who might benefit by such things.

Meanwhile though Ubuntu is putting out "feelers" of how users feel about tougher more current hardware requirements. Not sure if they will act on them, but it's a major reason why I chose to build a more current hardware platform.

My older system is around 12 years old....though it runs Linux Mint 21.3 quite well, with only an Nvidia GTX 650Ti and an Intel i5 3570k.

 

[Outdated]

Meanwhile though Ubuntu is putting out "feelers" of how users feel about tougher more current hardware requirements. Not sure if they will act on them, but it's a major reason why I chose to build a more current hardware platform.

Fedora makes a good fallback for that reason - their extensive support for older hardware. It's because they're a commercial concern, CentOS and Red Hat Enterprise. Many large corporations are quite slow on updating computer systems so Fedora has to account for them too.

 

[Judge]

Fedora makes a good fallback for that reason - their extensive support for older hardware. It's because they're a commercial concern, CentOS and Red Hat Enterprise. Many large corporations are quite slow on updating computer systems so Fedora has to account for them too.

If I had to guess, I suspect a number of Linux Distros will continue to incorporate such features that allow users to continue to use older, but perfectly good running computers. I've even played with the notion of using Mint Mate or Xfce just to see them fly on my newer system.

Meanwhile Microsoft insists everyone buy new computers to accommodate their OS. Would be amusing if those corporations would begin to migrate to Windows, though I suppose so many of them are contractually married to Microsoft. Their loss.