The time now is Thu 20 Jun 2013, 05:50
All times are UTC - 4 |
|
Page 104 of 155 [2324 Posts] |
Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, ..., 153, 154, 155 Next |
| Author |
Message |
gcmartin
Joined: 14 Oct 2005 Posts: 2693 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2012, 17:11 Post subject:
|
|
@Playdayz you shared Is this a "pre-announcment"? or a reference to someone else's work (i'e' Pemasu)?
Anyway, looking forward .....
______________________________________
| Iguleder wrote: | My advice to you, playdayz: make a x86_64 flavor of this kernel.
This has five benefits:
- Access to 4 GB (or more) RAM, without the PAE issues (e.g instability under certain circumstances).
- The ability to run x86_64 binaries (e.g compile x86_64 stuff from a chroot environment).
- The performance boost of 64-bit computing - e.g some heavy computations (such as compression) implemented in kernel mode are now faster.
- Same userland - no need to recompile anything or create a separate package repository, as with i486/i686 switching.
- Dual-kernel ISOs with two identical kernels - one for 64-bit machines and another for 32-bit ones - it's quite cool. | @Iguleder shares these great Benefits. LightHouse64 has demonstrated these.
There is one issue that I hope my statement clarifies. PAE doesn't have any more of an instability issue than "normal" or the "4GB only" 32bit kernels present. It, like the others 32bit mentioned, is stable.
The PROBLEM with PAE is that there are a very few CPUs manufactured by Intel and others which (for their cost considerations) did NOT include the PAE hardware. And, some BIOSes were also shipped with a settings that could also have impacted PAE use. But, for the most part, this is a ratity given the 15 years PAE has been built-into CPUs.
Thus, if you can, run 64bit! If you cannot, use 32bit PAE as it affords use of ALL of the RAM you can throw at it (assuming no CPU issues - which you will find out almost immediately), Lastly 32bit non-PAE runs just as fast (reviewing performance measurements already done by both vendors (intel and AMD) as well as independent test reports. PAE merely shines in Puppy which run RAM based because the filesystem is ALL of your RAM.
Hope this helps
_________________ Get ACTIVE; Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit the people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
Google's Puppy Search Engine
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
playdayz

Joined: 25 Apr 2008 Posts: 3705
|
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2012, 17:24 Post subject:
|
|
| Quote: | Downloaded vlc-1.1.7.-full-lucid52 from PPM.
It seems to work OK, but did get this message after the install check.
Problem? |
I don't think so. Sometimes PPM misses dependencies that are really there. If it works it's OK. There is also a 1.1.10. This vlc 2.0 is for me working in quick testing -> http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=76271
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
rerwin

Joined: 24 Aug 2005 Posts: 1324 Location: Maine, USA
|
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2012, 18:27 Post subject:
|
|
| jim3630 wrote: | did fresh frugal instal lupu plus to same hp laptop.
wl recognized eth1 by sns but not able to make the connection.
connection wizard easily made connection on this troublesome
Broadcom Corporation BCM4313.
This is the opposite of yesterdays install lupulibre where
connection wizard failed and sns made the connection.
seems odd and cannot remember how prior install of lupu plus
went so attached file. |
1. Lupuplus has the older wl driver which uses eth1 and gives you trouble.
2. With lupulibre, you installed the 2 packages that add support for both the old and a newer version of the wl driver (which appears to successfully support your device), but did not do that when you ran lupuplus. The 2 packages fix the problem you are having. Please install the broadcom driver package I posted on page 100 and either of the "arch_update" packages I posted on pages 100 & 101, then try again. You should not see eth1, but only wlan0 as the wifi device.
Richard
Last edited by rerwin on Thu 12 Apr 2012, 18:42; edited 1 time in total
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
playdayz

Joined: 25 Apr 2008 Posts: 3705
|
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2012, 18:35 Post subject:
|
|
volhut, it would be a miracle if this updated Intel video driver for Lucid from Ubuntu Lucid Updates made any difference to Stellarium. You would need to restart the X-server after installing the pet.
| Description |
|

Download |
| Filename |
intel_video-lucid-update.pet |
| Filesize |
986.78 KB |
| Downloaded |
93 Time(s) |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
jim3630

Joined: 13 Feb 2011 Posts: 792 Location: Northern Nevada
|
Posted: Thu 12 Apr 2012, 20:55 Post subject:
|
|
| rerwin wrote: | Please install the broadcom driver package I posted on page 100 and either of the "arch_update" packages I posted on pages 100 & 101, then try again. You should not see eth1, but only wlan0 as the wifi device.
Richard |
Richard thanks.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Volhout

Joined: 28 Dec 2008 Posts: 244
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 02:29 Post subject:
|
|
| playdayz wrote: | | volhut, it would be a miracle if this updated Intel video driver for Lucid from Ubuntu Lucid Updates made any difference to Stellarium. You would need to restart the X-server after installing the pet. |
The intel driver did not fix it. I am going to read through Pesamu's advice first. But I am not sure if the problems I have relate to his work on Qt. Since it works on other hardware on LupuLibre, on Nvidia HW, Qt should not be the problem.
UPDATE: when I use Xvesa on 1024x768x24 the Stellarium 1.10.6 SFS works on my system. It is slow (graphics), but it works. Using Xorg on the same settings 1024x768x24 does not work, neither does the native setting for my system 1280x1024x24.
I did not know Xvesa supported OpenGL (via Xorg-High ?)
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
James C

Joined: 26 Mar 2009 Posts: 4768 Location: Kentucky
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 03:23 Post subject:
|
|
| playdayz wrote: | TEASER
Don't know what will come of it, but it boots and connects, and reboots and creates and uses a pupsave. |
Might as well give it a try, but I agree with Iguleder that x86_64 is the way of the future.
| Iguleder wrote: | My advice to you, playdayz: make a x86_64 flavor of this kernel. |
It's most certainly possible and appears to work pretty darn well.
| Description |
|
| Filesize |
27.41 KB |
| Viewed |
945 Time(s) |

|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
Aitch

Joined: 04 Apr 2007 Posts: 6825 Location: Chatham, Kent, UK
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 11:25 Post subject:
|
|
Volhout
I had a box with brookdale 845G video which gave all sorts of problems
I think I cured it by adding mesa and going into bios and resetting the default video memory size to match the video...I got good speed and stability afterwards - though I also came across a lot of 'this patch isn't working' posts when searching....there were kernel problems too, apparently, so look for patches for your kernel
Aitch
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
playdayz

Joined: 25 Apr 2008 Posts: 3705
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 11:40 Post subject:
|
|
| Quote: | | I agree with Iguleder that x86_64 is the way of the future. |
I agree also, James C. But it won't be me who does it I am using the kernel from racy 5.3. One thing I am interested in is whether it makes a difference whether a kernel is built-in with Woof or added later manually. I am building it in with Woof.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
James C

Joined: 26 Mar 2009 Posts: 4768 Location: Kentucky
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 12:38 Post subject:
|
|
| playdayz wrote: | | One thing I am interested in is whether it makes a difference whether a kernel is built-in with Woof or added later manually. I am building it in with Woof. |
Got a feeling it'll go much smoother using Woof....
Anyway, it'll give us a new release to experiment with.Might as well go for it.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
bigpup

Joined: 11 Oct 2009 Posts: 3692 Location: Charleston S.C. USA
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 16:41 Post subject:
|
|
| playdayz wrote: | | Quote: | | I agree with Iguleder that x86_64 is the way of the future. |
I agree also, James C. But it won't be me who does it I am using the kernel from racy 5.3. One thing I am interested in is whether it makes a difference whether a kernel is built-in with Woof or added later manually. I am building it in with Woof. |
Playdayz,
Do not do it! In no way should you proceed! You have better things to do! What are you wasting your time for! Total wast! Who needs it! Who wants it! What are you thinking!
GOT YOU FIRED UP TO DO IT?
I HOPE SO!!!!!!!!!
PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE!
_________________ I have found, in trying to help people, that the things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
Puppy Help 101 An interactive tutorial for Puppy 5.2.5
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
jim3630

Joined: 13 Feb 2011 Posts: 792 Location: Northern Nevada
|
Posted: Fri 13 Apr 2012, 17:30 Post subject:
|
|
| bigpup wrote: | | playdayz wrote: | | Quote: | | I agree with Iguleder that x86_64 is the way of the future. |
I agree also, James C. But it won't be me who does it I am using the kernel from racy 5.3. One thing I am interested in is whether it makes a difference whether a kernel is built-in with Woof or added later manually. I am building it in with Woof. |
Playdayz,
Do not do it! In no way should you proceed! You have better things to do! What are you wasting your time for! Total wast! Who needs it! Who wants it! What are you thinking!
GOT YOU FIRED UP TO DO IT?
I HOPE SO!!!!!!!!!
PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE!  |
1+
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
bigpup

Joined: 11 Oct 2009 Posts: 3692 Location: Charleston S.C. USA
|
Posted: Sat 14 Apr 2012, 16:52 Post subject:
|
|
| playdayz wrote: | | Quote: | Downloaded vlc-1.1.7.-full-lucid52 from PPM.
It seems to work OK, but did get this message after the install check.
Problem? |
I don't think so. Sometimes PPM misses dependencies that are really there. If it works it's OK. There is also a 1.1.10. This vlc 2.0 is for me working in quick testing -> http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=76271 |
If I run VLC 1.1.7 from the console. I also get these error messages:
| Quote: | # vlc
VLC media player 1.1.7 The Luggage (revision exported)
Blocked: call to unsetenv("DBUS_ACTIVATION_ADDRESS")
Blocked: call to unsetenv("DBUS_ACTIVATION_BUS_TYPE")
[0x8103834] main interface error: no suitable interface module
[0x8067564] main libvlc error: interface "globalhotkeys,none" initialization failed
[0x8067564] main libvlc: Pokretanje VLC-a s polaznim sučeljem. Koristite 'cvlc' za uporabu VLC-a bez sučelja. (my translation inserted here: running vlc with starting interface. please use 'cvlc' for using vlc without interface)
Blocked: call to setlocale(6, "")
Error: call to XSetErrorHandler(0xb5bba600)
Error: call to XSetIOErrorHandler(0xb5bba5c0)
Warning: call to rand()
Warning: call to rand()
Warning: call to rand()
Illegal instruction
# cvlc
VLC media player 1.1.7 The Luggage (revision exported)
Blocked: call to unsetenv("DBUS_ACTIVATION_ADDRESS")
Blocked: call to unsetenv("DBUS_ACTIVATION_BUS_TYPE")
[0x810397c] main interface error: no suitable interface module
[0x8067564] main libvlc error: interface "globalhotkeys,none" initialization failed
[0x8103254] dummy interface: using the dummy interface module... |
If I run VLC 1.1.10 from console only get this:
| Quote: | [0x80d2b70] main interface error: no suitable interface module
[0x804d3f8] main libvlc error: interface "globalhotkeys,none" initialization failed
[0x804d3f8] main libvlc: Running vlc with the default interface. Use 'cvlc' to use vlc without interface.
|
VLC 2.0.0 from console get this:
| Quote: | VLC media player 2.0.0 Twoflower (revision 2.0.0-0-g421a4fc)
[0x80d2b70] main interface error: no suitable interface module
[0x804d3f8] main libvlc error: interface "globalhotkeys,none" initialization failed
[0x804d3f8] main libvlc: Running vlc with the default interface. Use 'cvlc' to use vlc without interface.
sh-4.1#
|
Seems to indicate the VLC 1.1.7 may not be something to have in the PPM.
_________________ I have found, in trying to help people, that the things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
Puppy Help 101 An interactive tutorial for Puppy 5.2.5
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
bigpup

Joined: 11 Oct 2009 Posts: 3692 Location: Charleston S.C. USA
|
Posted: Sat 14 Apr 2012, 17:13 Post subject:
|
|
There is this warning in the topic for VLC 2.0.0.sfs:
| Quote: | EDIT: the vlc sfs also works in the new Slacko beta but if are using
qt-473 in slacko the qt-480 in the vlc sfs will clobber it and the
programs in slacko that used qt-473 won't work any longer. |
Is this something to worry about if using in Lucid 5.2.8-005?
_________________ I have found, in trying to help people, that the things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
Puppy Help 101 An interactive tutorial for Puppy 5.2.5
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
playdayz

Joined: 25 Apr 2008 Posts: 3705
|
Posted: Sat 14 Apr 2012, 18:07 Post subject:
|
|
| Quote: | EDIT: the vlc sfs also works in the new Slacko beta but if are using
qt-473 in slacko the qt-480 in the vlc sfs will clobber it and the
programs in slacko that used qt-473 won't work any longer.
Is this something to worry about if using in Lucid 5.2.8-005? |
Not really. Lucid does not have a separate Qt package like Slacko does.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
|
|
Page 104 of 155 [2324 Posts] |
Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, ..., 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, ..., 153, 154, 155 Next |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|