Installation report 2 for beta 1

[John Summerfied]

Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2005 at 03:05:39PM +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
>  > Same system as before.
>  > This time I burned a heap of CDs to try a CD install. Fairly uneventful
>  > (I knew
>  > what to do about the disk partitioning by now), and the display is much
>  > better
>  > with "resolution=1280x800"
>  > 
>  > Actually booting was a problem. The system atorebooted about immediately
>  > unpacking the kernel.
>  > 
>  > Finding an SMP kernel as the only one was a surprise.
> 
> As the fine release notes mentioned, booting with mem=nopentium 'fixes' this.
> 
>  > Reboot, selinux=0 and all's well, I can install the kernel and the new
>  > kernel
>  > boots.
> 
> Odd that selinux stopped the reboot bug. Anyways, as you've found out,
> the latest kernel in rawhide fixes this bug properly, so it should 'just boot'.
> 
>  > I wish to use the Atheros driver; I understand RH won't ship the HAL, but it
>  > needs to make it easy for users to implement their right to choose to
>  > use it.
>  > 
>  > Same for the internal modem. Ordinary users cannot be expected to have the
>  > skills or desire to hunt round the Internet for the driver.
> 
> Those other distros you mention ship "not merged upstream" drivers.
> Fedora doesn't do that.  Look at the mess we had with the ipw2xxx drivers.
> Those were just two drivers we were carrying before they went upstream,
> and it was a nightmare trying to keep them in sync with upstream.
> Now imagine the same problem with a few dozen drivers ?
> The answer is "ask these projects to get their work upstream".

I probably wasn't using wireless then, maybe wasn't using FC either: I 
used Debian for some time, and when I started using wireless it was with 
prism54 in or after 2.6.8 and only had to worry about firmware.

I do recall comparing the number of lines of Linux kernel with the 
number of lines of RH patches back around RHL 7.3. Are you saying RH has 
changed its ways?

I've taken the easy way out: I reinstalled SUSE 10.0.*

> 
>  > Plugging in a PCMCIA Orinoco 11b wireless card resulted in two! interfaces,
>  > neither the eth1 I expected (and get on FC3). Instead, I have wlan0 and
>  > wifi0.
> 
> No idea on this one. The orinoco driver should only create ethX interfaces.
> What drivers are in use ?

I'm certain it was orinoco: did take a look to see whether I could see 
anything else odd.

> 
>  > There are also lots of these messages:
>  > search_node dbd094b4 start_node dbd094b4 return_node 00000000
>  > ACPI-0508: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.BAT1._BST] (Node
>  > dbd098d4), AE_NOT_FOUND
>  > ACPI-0339: *** Error: Looking up [Z004] in namespace, AE_NOT_FOUND
>  > search_node dbd094b4 start_node dbd094b4 return_node 00000000
>  > ACPI-0508: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.BAT1._BST]
>  > (Node dbd098d4), AE_NOT_FOUND
>  > 
>  > fwiw Ununtu and SuSE have them too. Google showed some discussion on lkml.
> 
> ACPI debug spew de jour ;-)
> That looks familiar, I think I've seen at least 1-2 instances of that
> in bugzilla. Battery reporting seems to have a few issues in 2.6.14/15

Google suggest it was well-enough known that there probably wasn't any 
point in reporting it. OTOH I thought to ensure it's a known problem 
here too.


*
I have to reorganise the drive, there is currentlly space the partition 
tables won't let me use.



-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au  Z1aaaaaaa at computerdatasafe.com.au
Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/

do not reply off-list