[64studio-devel] 64studio 1.4.0 not booting properly after installing from a cd

[Tuukka Jääskeläinen]

Hi everyone, sorry for being so long offline. I just changed my ISP, and
there's some problems with the connection already. I will try the previous
suggestions and tell you the results, as soon as I get my internet
connection back.

And for the bug, I will try to help you by giving all the information you
need, since I have very little experience with Linux itself. Hopefully there
is a explanation behind this thing...

I will try to install the 64studio from the 1.0 ISO when I get home. I tell
you the results tomorrow.

2007/7/11, Free Ekanayaka <free at 64studio.com>:
>
> Hi Daniel, hi Tuukka,
>
> |--==> Daniel James writes:
>
>   DJ> Hi Free, hi Tuukka,
>   TJ> How can it be, that there is no sdb1? Where did the installer
> install all
>   TJ> those files?
>
>   DJ> I have a new idea...
>
>   DJ> Tuukka, do you have lines in the output of the 'lspci' command
> exactly
>   DJ> like this:
>
>   DJ> IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) IDE Controller
>   DJ> (rev 01)
>   DJ> IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801GB/GR/GH (ICH7 Family) Serial
>   DJ> ATA Storage Controller IDE (rev 01)
>
>   DJ> From your lsmod output, I believe your motherboard has the notorious
>   DJ> ITE8211 or IT8211 IDE controller. According to this page:
>
>   DJ> http://gentoo-wiki.com/ITE8211
>
>   DJ> this controller needs the following kernel modules in the config:
>
>   DJ> Intel PATA MPIIX support (PATA_MPIIX)
>
>   DJ> and/or
>
>   DJ> IT821x PATA support (Experimental) (PATA_IT821X)
>
>   DJ> neither of which are set in /proc/config.gz on my desktop machine
> (I'm
>   DJ> running the latest 2.6.21 package from apt.64studio.com).
>
> That's a very good guess, thanks. These two flags:
>
> CONFIG_PATA_IT821X
> CONFIG_PATA_MPIIX
>
> were have been switched off to prevent the relevant modules to be
> built, and hence the weird naming bug (hda/sda) to occur. So by
> enabling them, it could be that we fix Tuukka's problem, but we
> re-introduce the old bug for other setups.
>
> Therefore, although I'm not happy with that and very sorry for Tuukka,
> I would suggest to not touch the current kernel (which has now been
> testing for a while) and release 64 Studio 2.0 with that, listing
> Tuukka's problem as a know bug. Then we can immediately open the
> testing branch to post-2.0 development and build a new kernel with
> those flags enabled.
>
> Ciao!
>
> Free
>



-- 
- Tuukka J. / 50% of Tripteaser / 50% of Solarians
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.64studio.com/pipermail/64studio-devel/attachments/20070711/58329f31/attachment.htm