I’m not sure that’s true in a lot of linux use cases. Linux and windows handle drivers very differently. There are a lot of graphics problems which have nothing to do with the driver, and when they do it’s usually wrong driver instead of driver acting up
Then OP will find out this isn’t something they need.
You should still answer the question, instead of questioning the question.
It is infuriating how every technical question has to be justified, as if ‘why do you want that?’ is always a relevant and wise question. Even though it’s omnipresent, effortless, and adds literally nothing by itself.
The answer is “i dont know why you need this, this is probably not possible in linux and have another way, but it is important what scenario makes you want to do that to give the right answer”.
People dont just restart their Graphics driver for fun.
A conversation is not harassment. You are choosing to continue having it.
I know OP was trying to kludge some weird problem - that is why I said as much, yesterday. People don’t ask how to restart their graphics driver for fun.
They need help. “But why do you want that?” almost never helps. It is help prevention. It is where tech support threads end bitterly. Try ‘here’s the answer, please don’t,’ then doing the thing you did.
But you tell them how to disable and reenable their graphics driver, then xorg crashes, their problem isn’t solved and they give up. This question is “what is the problem you are trying to fix?”
That answer will help someone more than giving them an answer that won’t fix anything
Third time: by all means, ask the question AFTER a direct answer. A direct answer absolves any too-clever “X/Y problem” philosophizing. And obviously people would love to just not have the problems they’re trying to kludge.
by all means, ask the question AFTER a direct answer
As original commenter pointed out, by the time they commented there were 12 direct answers to the question, none of which were likely to solve any problems. I think you’re qualifying your statement after the fact to regain ground
I’m not sure that’s true in a lot of linux use cases. Linux and windows handle drivers very differently. There are a lot of graphics problems which have nothing to do with the driver, and when they do it’s usually wrong driver instead of driver acting up
Then OP will find out this isn’t something they need.
You should still answer the question, instead of questioning the question.
It is infuriating how every technical question has to be justified, as if ‘why do you want that?’ is always a relevant and wise question. Even though it’s omnipresent, effortless, and adds literally nothing by itself.
“I want to get rid of my hair, how do I shave my hair on Linux”
“Why do you want to get rid of your hair?”
'Because when I didnt have sissors before on Windows, I always shaved it to have it not annoy me"
“But now that you have sissors, why not just cut it”?
Making up a stupid analogy totally excuses the million derailed threads where someone genuinely just needs something you don’t.
Stop letting your ignorance prevent them from solving their ignorance. Answer the goddamn question, first. Feel free to snit at them - after.
The answer is “i dont know why you need this, this is probably not possible in linux and have another way, but it is important what scenario makes you want to do that to give the right answer”.
People dont just restart their Graphics driver for fun.
And please stop harassing me.
A conversation is not harassment. You are choosing to continue having it.
I know OP was trying to kludge some weird problem - that is why I said as much, yesterday. People don’t ask how to restart their graphics driver for fun.
They need help. “But why do you want that?” almost never helps. It is help prevention. It is where tech support threads end bitterly. Try ‘here’s the answer, please don’t,’ then doing the thing you did.
But you tell them how to disable and reenable their graphics driver, then xorg crashes, their problem isn’t solved and they give up. This question is “what is the problem you are trying to fix?”
That answer will help someone more than giving them an answer that won’t fix anything
But asking it often results in neither answer.
Third time: by all means, ask the question AFTER a direct answer. A direct answer absolves any too-clever “X/Y problem” philosophizing. And obviously people would love to just not have the problems they’re trying to kludge.
But that’s not what they came here to ask for.
As original commenter pointed out, by the time they commented there were 12 direct answers to the question, none of which were likely to solve any problems. I think you’re qualifying your statement after the fact to regain ground