Ey!
Nice page! It makes it much more clear than now, I think.
I answer questions inline here:
sajolida:
> I'm sending here for review a draft of a new page of known issues only
> for graphics cards.
>
> This is related to the restructuring of our support pages that we
> proposed with Cody on https://tails.boum.org/blueprint/support_page/
> and triggered by the new error message when GDM fails to start (#14521).
>
> You can see the structure here:
>
> https://git.tails.boum.org/tails/diff/wiki/src/support/known_issues/graphics.mdwn?h=doc/15399-gdm-debugging
>
> I'd like the Foundations team and Help desk to have a look and comment
> before I start migrating all the data we currently have in
> /support/knowns_issues.mdwn.
>
> For example, I'm wondering:
>
> - Shall we advertise people to try the "Troubleshooting Mode"? Does it
> help with graphics cards?
> It helps to boot on some cards when the driver is not working. But those users
maybe can use a specific boot option to solve their hardware support problem.
> - Does it make sense to link to Redmine tickets? For example, #11095 for
> Radeon HD was closed because we had nothing else to do but the problem
> still exist.
>
> Is it worth making this information visible to users?
Yes, hopefully we could fix old issues maybe, or close them as resolved.>
> Is it helpful to keep it hidden in an HTML comment like I did?
> I didn't saw that.
> - Is it worth keeping track of when each issue has been updated last?
> Here I'm proposing to keep this information in an HTML comment.
This would be a great information to have. Sometimes I look at the Tails
version on the issue to have a similar information.
> This is information that we can get from the Git history (I tried and
> it takes a couple of minutes) but I thought that it might help
> cleaning the page from now and then. I thought about doing this for
> the other known issues pages as well.
>
> - It would be good to have names and IDs of graphics cards exactly as
> they are displayed to people. Right now I bet that it's not the case
> but the page will get better as people report errors.
Yes. I agree.
> Are their ways for Technical writers and Help desk to complete or
> verify this information? For example, could we answer questions like:
>
> - « How can I know the ID of "Radeon HD 8790M"? »
I ask users many times to give me the output of lspci, and it also comes on WhisperBack
> - « What name is displayed to the users of "Radeon HD 8790M"? »
I look this up on the Internet but sometimes it is difficult, specially when users
tell you a 'laptop model' with several probable graphic cards.
>
> - Is the "(rev XXX)" part of the graphics card description relevant?
>
> If so I'll have to talk about "name, ID, and revision" instead of only
> "name and ID".
I don't know, I guess yes. I think it may be a different card then.
Are you sure it is said 'graphics card'? I always thought it was 'graphic card'/'graphic cards'.
