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

[Tuukka Jääskeläinen]

Okay. Installed the 1.0 release, and probably doesn't come as a surprise
that it acted out the same way as the releases I tried before.

By the way. I couldn't get any output when typing lspci. Is it just an alias
for some other longer command? I would like to check if I suffer from that
exact bug.

And if I do, what do you suggest I do, if I want this to work flawlessly?
Buy a new motherboard? Or would a SATA-raid pci-card work, if it's different
chipset?

2007/7/11, Tuukka Jääskeläinen <tuukka.j at gmail.com>:
>
> 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
>



-- 
- 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/ee17a7fb/attachment-0001.htm