If this check were not here, Nvidia would still not work. This serves to reduce our bug report volume. However, by deleting these few lines of code (or specifying the appropriate command line argument), Nvidia could work tomorrow if they shipped GBM support.

If that check were not there, would intel for display + nvidia for compute work? Better chance than now.

The flag is there for you to override if you think you know better. We don't answer questions or provide support for any use-case with the proprietary driver.

Refusing to run if a particular kernel module is loaded (even if you don't touch it at all) is overstepping. You should at least provide an override flag.

There is an override flag, its linked in the code snippet.

Use "--unsupported-gpu" or "--my-next-gpu-wont-be-nvidia" to bypass the check and allow sway to launch.

Ah, er, jolly good then. Carry on.

I applied the `--my-next-gpu-wont-be-nvidia` flag to my hardware and replaced my Nvidia cards with AMD ones, and it is a quality of life improvement.

"--my-next-gpu-wont-be-nvidia"

--ill-pass.

It's implying I have a choice in the accelerators I could rent in a cluster... Yes, it's about using an intel GPU for display and a nvidia GPU to provide local development (latency being the primary reason).

It's just generally taking a reasonable stand ("I don't want to spend my time on Nvidia, especially not for free") into an unreasonable one ("Users who have Nvidia are bad and should be bullied").

Have you tried building from source and editing this code to not invoke?