New page on Puppy and the OLPC project

Promote Puppy !
Message
Author
bodo
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon 08 Dec 2008, 23:27

one more plea for olpc puppy

#21 Post by bodo »

Hello,
i would like to say "me too"!

I spent several(20-30) Hours trying to get the OLPC usable. I would love to use it as a document-reader with its excellent screen.
But I could not get Puppy running, and I dont know why, icewm and xfce are to slow.
So now my OLPC (G1G1) is gathering dust too, and now i am using a eee-pc clone with via hardware 4-5 hours runtime(good) and 800x480 screen(miserable).
I would like to beta-test if you have images for the OLPC.
I am a long time debian admin(part of my work), so I usually dont ask beginners Questions.


greetings and thanks for your work,
bodo

tristian
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed 06 May 2009, 12:48

#22 Post by tristian »

Hi, any news on puppy and olpc ??

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

overtaken

#23 Post by raffy »

OLPC has been overtaken by the eeePC and now other ARM-based netbooks.

There are active discussions here about Asus' eeePC and Acer's Aspire One. Puppy is not yet ported to ARM-based machines.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

Phoenix
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon 10 Nov 2008, 01:05

Re: overtaken

#24 Post by Phoenix »

[quote="raffy"]OLPC has been overtaken by the eeePC and now other ARM-based netbooks.[quote]

Overtaken?

My XO-1 has not changed into an eeePC that my parents own. The XO-1, as I stated has a better screen and is more durable. This thread is about Puppy on the OLPC and that is what I am looking forward to.

My IBM ThinkPad was long "overtaken" at the time I bought it used. Puppy works great on it. I believe the philosophy of puppy does not use the concept of overtaken.

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

open arena

#25 Post by raffy »

I mean "overtaken" in the open arena (among users who want to use another OS for their machine).

No other than Negroponte admitted to this initial mistake in XO1 development (from engadget):
"The XO-1 was really designed as if we were Apple," Nicholas Negroponte says in the interview. "The XO-2 will be designed as if we were Google - we'll want people to copy it. We'll make the constituent parts available. We'll try and get it out there using the exact opposite approach that we did with the XO-1."
That explains why users of G1G1 are effectively prevented from using the machine with other Linux builds.

Hopefully, the XO2 will live up to the new annnouncements. :)
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

tristian
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed 06 May 2009, 12:48

hmm

#26 Post by tristian »

To bad nobody took the time to get puppy to run on olpc ..probably BarryK lost interest since red hot stole puppy's chanse with the xo . It would have been great to run a fast easy softwhare on my xo 1 (in stead it seats colecting dust ..sugar is unuseable)

Hardwhare olpc is a great mini laptop that offers much more then an eepc and cheaper, It has a better screen , better batery life , an ebook reader posibility , a good inovative wifi but it is ruined by the slow hard to use softwhare . It's a shame, y would of payed for puppy on am xo (i'm shore that not just me) ..microsoft got it and came out with xp for the little laptop (@60$-80$ ) . To bad that Puppy bilders did not take advantage of that (a 10-20$ puppy for xo would have been a real help for olpc comunity and for puppy's development )

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

bios

#27 Post by raffy »

Using the XO1 with another distro involved painful work around the "firmware" BIOS and the use of new kernel (2.6.27 was recommended).

Now that Puppy is experimenting with a 2.6.30 kernel, you could try and get Puppy working on the XO1. There are discussions here about trying to load Puppy on the XO1.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

quickboot
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 17 Nov 2008, 09:18

#28 Post by quickboot »

bump. Anyone Linux/Puppy savvy able to figure out the challenging OLPC boot puzzle to get Puppy to work on it? Barry?

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#29 Post by mavrothal »

I used the newer puppy 4.3beta1 with the (olpc-aware) 2.6.29 kernel and a simple olpc.fth in a "boot" folder at the root of the stick

Code: Select all

\ Boot script
\ 
" root=/dev/sda4 rootfstype=fat16 console=ttyS0,115200 console=tty0 fbcon=font:SUN12x22" to boot-file
" disk:\vmlinuz" to boot-device
" disk:\initrd.gz" to ramdisk
setup-smbios
unfreeze
dcon-unfreeze
visible
boot
For the first time with puppy I saw that actually something is loading the camera and mic lights come on and off (the camera) and then it stops. Unfortunately I did not get off the OFW (the while) screen to get to a console and have a chance to see what's going on.

Then I used the F11-xo1/os5 vmlinuz (with the olpc 2.6.30 kernel) from here http://dev.laptop.org/~smparrish/xo-1/builds/ and all of a sudden I got a console and program loading(!) that stopped at

Code: Select all

Loading drivers needed to access disk drives           done
Searching for Puppy files in computer disk drivers...pp4a-423.sfs not found. Dropping out to initial-ramdisk console...
/bin/sh:can't access tty; job control turned off
The pp4a-423.sfs file is there but somehow not visible. I can only assume that the kernel module needed to recognize the puppy filesystem (sfs) is missing.
The kernel supports cramfs but the squashfs that the sfs files need(?), is missing.

As you can tell from my approach I'm a complete noob and recompiling the kernel is far beyond my limits. I just hope that a more capable person might take it and ride with it or that someone comes up with noob-appropriate instructions.
Just in case I also attache the dmesg output of this failed boot.
Attachments
puppy_dmesg.zip
(5.11 KiB) Downloaded 685 times

User avatar
Sit Heel Speak
Posts: 2595
Joined: Fri 31 Mar 2006, 03:22
Location: downwind

#30 Post by Sit Heel Speak »

I do not own an XO1 or whatever...however, am presently at work developing a custom Pup for the Dell Mini-9.

In order to load a Pup on the Mini-9 I had to devise a roundabout procedure using Rudy Puppy. I posted the procedure here. You need to have a nearby computer with a live-CD or already-existing installation of Rudy Puppy (a 2.14 variant). Perhaps other 2.14 Pup(pie)s will also work.

Maybe my procedure will work on other netbooks as well, provided it has a usb port and can boot from usb.

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#31 Post by mavrothal »

Thanks for the pointer Sit Heel Speak.
I wish things where so simple...
You see besides the lack or proper BIOS in OLPC-XO hardware, they also have components that require specific kernel patches to allow a standard linux to run.

A properly crafted olpc.fth file (if the above is not good enough) can solve the BIOS problem but the kernel is a different story. Even the SugarLabs Fedora11 and Fedora12-based Sugar builds (the standard XO-1 UI) that use the official Fedora kernel, can not run properly on the XO. Patched are pushed *slowly* upstream but I do not know if they ever going to make it all into the official kernel branch.
So if puppy is to ever run on the XO-1 hardware (a perfect fit I might say) has to start with a proper kernel and then see what else is needed.

I do not know if puppy kernel will ever have OLPC patches. It is more likely for OLPC kernel to include puppy required modules. So what I'm hopping for is to get something running on the XO, so a pupplet can be generated, and debugged and then see if the required changes can be incorporated in the "official" OLPC kernel.

There are more than a million XO-1s out there and although most of those are "State owned" and run, they are given to school kids to have and keep with then all the time... Despite its ingenuity the Fedora/python-based Sugar UI (or any standard Linux distro) is really *heavy* on the XO hardware. Puppy linux can give a new level of experience to its young users. Ideally the Sugar UI (that now can be packaged for many distros) could run as an option on the top of puppy and get rejuvenated (speed-wise)

But I'm blubbering... Back to the kernel... Any takers...? pointers?....

User avatar
Sit Heel Speak
Posts: 2595
Joined: Fri 31 Mar 2006, 03:22
Location: downwind

#32 Post by Sit Heel Speak »

mavrothal wrote:...components that require specific kernel patches...So if puppy is to ever run on the XO-1 hardware...has to start with a proper kernel...
I understand. I'm developing a program to provide visual comparison across dotconfig's of several distro's, specifically Fedora 11, Ubuntu 9.04, and several Pup(pie)s. Thus I hope to learn what I need to add to the Puppy 2.6.29.6 Aug 22 kernel, to run all the gadgets my client wants to, on the Mini-9.

I could do a similar analysis for the XO-1, if I had the dotconfigs for the kernel(s) which have been patched to run most sweetly (or at least, least awfully) on it. This is the first I've heard of Fedora 12 (didn't know it had advanced beyond 11; 12 isn't supposed to come out until November 3rd, says Wikipedia) --are you referring to a Fedora 11 on which the kernel has been upgraded through version stepping and / or driver patches? If so, I would like a dotconfig for it, if you would be so kind as to attach it. And pointers to the patches. And then perhaps I can better grasp the problem.

Also any list you can point me to, of which CONFIG_ switch in menuconfig goes with which patch, would be helpful.

Is there a particular reason why a 2.6.30 kernel would be superior to a 2.6.29 kernel, on the XO-1?

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#33 Post by mavrothal »

Sit Heel Speak wrote:I could do a similar analysis for the XO-1, if I had the dotconfigs for the kernel(s) which have been patched to run most sweetly (or at least, least awfully) on it.
As I said kernel hacking is far from my abilities but I think that this mail http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel ... 24939.html has the info you want. You can also look here for kernel rpms http://dev.laptop.org/~dilinger/olpc-2.6.30-xo1/.
Sit Heel Speak wrote:This is the first I've heard of Fedora 12 (didn't know it had advanced beyond 11; 12 isn't supposed to come out until November 3rd, says Wikipedia)
You are right. The F12 are development builds.
Sit Heel Speak wrote:If so, I would like a dotconfig for it, if you would be so kind as to attach it. And pointers to the patches. And then perhaps I can better grasp the problem.

Also any list you can point me to, of which CONFIG_ switch in menuconfig goes with which patch, would be helpful.

Is there a particular reason why a 2.6.30 kernel would be superior to a 2.6.29 kernel, on the XO-1?
I'm not sure I understand what exactly you are asking for. Sorry. If you can tell me where I should be looking for these (eg in my XO?) I could try to find them... And I certainly have no idea if and why 2.6.30 may be superior to 2.6.29. All I know is that is used successfully on OLPC hardware.
Thanks for your help.

User avatar
Sit Heel Speak
Posts: 2595
Joined: Fri 31 Mar 2006, 03:22
Location: downwind

#34 Post by Sit Heel Speak »

mavrothal wrote:You can also look here for kernel rpms http://dev.laptop.org/~dilinger/olpc-2.6.30-xo1/...no idea if and why 2.6.30 may be superior to 2.6.29. All I know is that is used successfully on OLPC hardware.
Ah so. Well, if Mr. Saxena is the lead developer, and he says "all development for both XO-1 and XO-1.5 will be done on the olpc-2.6.30 branch of the olpc-2.6 repository" then that means 2.6.30 will be from here on out superior!

Back when I have something practical to contribute.

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#35 Post by mavrothal »

Sit Heel Speak wrote:
mavrothal wrote:...components that require specific kernel patches...So if puppy is to ever run on the XO-1 hardware...has to start with a proper kernel...
I understand. I'm developing a program to provide visual comparison across dotconfig's of several distro's, specifically Fedora 11, Ubuntu 9.04, and several Pup(pie)s. Thus I hope to learn what I need to add to the Puppy 2.6.29.6 Aug 22 kernel, to run all the gadgets my client wants to, on the Mini-9.
Any progress on that? I'm trying to use olpc-kernel source with squashfs support to rebuild the puppy 4.2.1 kernel and also meet olpc-xo1 requirements/patches (they are both 2.6.25) but the menuconfig is a nightmare...

Alternatively, can anyone point me to a post that describes the minimal puppy kernel configuration, eg without the components that assure compatibility with a wide range of hardware/peripherals/network/video/modems etc. The olpc_config should take care of the hardware compatibility part but what else (other than squashfs) is _mandatory_ for the full puppy experience?
I did look around the forum and BK's pages/blog bun no luck...
Thx

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

xopuplet

#36 Post by mavrothal »

As mentioned, I'm trying to get puppy 4.2.1 on the OLPC XO-1 computer. Given the many hardware requirements of the XO I decided to go with the 2.6.25-derived OLPC kernel patched with the official Fedora-9 squashfs-3.3 patch. I used a full install of puppy4.2.1 with devx_421.sfs, kernel-src-2.6.25.16-patched-puppy4.1.sfs as well as puppy-unleashed-core-421 all in full install in the HD.
Comparing the Puppy DOTconfig and OLPC_defconfig I made a kernel that will keep OLPC requirements and will incorporate many puppy settings (I left out the firmware, PCI etc things that are useless for the specific hardware). The vmlinuz will boot the XO fine but will not load puppy 421. I would guess because the initrd.gz is not from the same kernel. And here is the problem.
The OLPC kernel will not boot puppy on the development machine. I'm using puppy on Parallels VM on a Mac (so I can go back after the inevitable mess-ups) and the OLPC kernel will not boot in a VM (Parallels, VMWare or Qemu) nor in a modern Intel CPU! Of course puppy's mkinitrd script will make an init from the running kernel, so I'm stuck.
I tried to make a new initrd just by manually issuing the relevant script commands but ended up with an initrd that gave me a kernel panic when I booted the XO.
So the short question is: is it possible to to make a pupplet with a rebuild kernel when this kernel is not running on the development machine?
I do not care if the development machine will be bricked at the end of the process since I can always go back to a previous snapshot. As long as I can get vmlinuz, initrd.gz and "xopup".sfs in a stick, I'm fine.
Oh... did I mentioned that I'm new to Linux development and this is my first attempt in puppy development?...

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

new kernel

#37 Post by raffy »

Puppy 4.3beta3 has new kernel. You may want to try this.
http://puppylinux.com/blog/?viewDetailed=01072
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

Re: new kernel

#38 Post by mavrothal »

raffy wrote:Puppy 4.3beta3 has new kernel. You may want to try this.
http://puppylinux.com/blog/?viewDetailed=01072
Well, the pup4.3b1 gave me some hope on this and got me started (see previous page). However even the olpc-2.6.30 kernel is not working properly on the olpc-xo yet, so I opted for the "tested" 2.6.25. Also the patched 2.6.30.5 kernel source is not available yet.
However 2.6."whatever" kernel will not solve the problem of remastering from a non-booted kernel. Any thoughts on that?

quickboot
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 17 Nov 2008, 09:18

Please Barry - Work your magic!

#39 Post by quickboot »

Any luck getting Puppy to work on the OLPC?

All my rudimentary attempts have failed, and I have yet to read a successful post anywhere on the vast Internet.

Thanks!

User avatar
Aitch
Posts: 6518
Joined: Wed 04 Apr 2007, 15:57
Location: Chatham, Kent, UK

#40 Post by Aitch »

Message to BarryK

Any chance of you editing this thread's first page link to http://www.puppyos.com/olpc/ ....

a now defunct 'parked' webpage/IP address

and title....'new' ....page?

Any news since
BarryK wrote:I am now experimenting with the 2.6.27.x kernel, which is "OLPC aware".
also, have you seen mavrothal's pages here

http://www.olpcnews.com/forum/index.php ... 384.0;wap2

http://www.olpcnews.com/forum/index.php ... 356.0;wap2

Would it not be possible to 'make overtures' for renewing funding/partnership with the OLPC team as you, ttuuxxx, and SHS to name a few, are already 'involved in this development', as I understand it....?

IMHO, this would be a huge kudos for Puppy/woof if it could be pulled off to get the XO-1 to boot/run Puppy

....and a huge boost to the apparently dying, but million+ component XO-1 project

thanks, Barry, ....& good luck, team! :D

Aitch :)

Post Reply