Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Thu 02 Oct 2014, 00:25
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » House Training » Bugs ( Submit bugs )
2.13 final, like beta 1,2 will not start with config file
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 1 of 3 Posts_count   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Author Message
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Tue 02 Jan 2007, 11:44    Post_subject:  2.13 final, like beta 1,2 will not start with config file  

I've opened a new thread here for the "final." (I hope it isn't.)

The situation is similar here. I've just gone through another session of xorgwizard hell. Using the new "TEST" button I get, as before, a good X screen. The only new possible new clue I have is that after I press ctl+alt+bspc I see a fleeting text line, too brief to read, but it seems to say "X connection to 0.0 broken . . ." or such.

Am I the only one with such a problem? All three 2.13s have started without a pup_sav.3fs file, but none start with one - a good one that always works with 2.12. What's wrong with 2.13 that wasn't with 2.12?

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Sit Heel Speak


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 2595
Location: downwind

PostPosted: Tue 02 Jan 2007, 16:25    Post_subject:  

At http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=14092 WhoDo says he had to rename his pup_save.3fs to pup_save.2fs to get it to work.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Tue 02 Jan 2007, 17:06    Post_subject:  

Yes, thanks, I had seen that and tried it, but it wouldn't go at all.

I have tried several different config files, both 0.5G and my usual 1Gb, different computers, with and without copying sfs and zdrv, etc. Xvesa always worked with all prior puppies, but it won't work at all in this situation.

It's been baffling, so different from the great prior puppy experience I've come to appreciate.

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7047
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Tue 02 Jan 2007, 17:52    Post_subject:  

The "X connection broken..." message is okay.

Xvesa won't work!? It should do, there's no difference from before.
For the Video Wizard, the very first dlg window now asks do you want Xorg or Xvesa -- what happens if you choose Xvesa?
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Tue 02 Jan 2007, 18:09    Post_subject:  

Yes, I did try that - that's how I know it doesn't work. As I recall I get into a cyclic "type xwin" situation.

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:02    Post_subject:  

Good morning, Barry,

Finally some news. I've probably been driving people up the wall with this, but mostly myself. Here's what I found.

It's not a video problem at all. But there is something about the pup_sav.3fs file that 2.13 doesn't like and that keeps it from starting the video. As I've said over and over, 2.12 likes the configuration file and works perfectly with it.

So here's what I did. I started 2.12 without any configuration file. I did a modest amount of configuring - set the background to grey, enabled autohide, installed the Gimp, and connected to the internet. A very small amount of customizing compared to my working 2.12 system. This was then saved at exit as a new pup_sav.3fs.

I then booted from 2.13 final. It liked this simple new configuration and took off immediately, in Xvesa which I always use, no wizards, etc. So 2.13 _does_ start with a configuration file, just not the one I want, unfortunately.

So the mystery is what makes a configuration "incompatible," the fear of having to start over at each new version. I think we need to understand this in order to have confidence that a future upgrade will be successful. Right now I will have to start over if I want to use the new features in 2.13.

(Oops, I just noticed that the config is still a .3fs Shouldn't that have been converted into a .2fs? I'll run it again and check.)

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
John Doe

Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Posts: 1689
Location: Michigan, US

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:14    Post_subject:  

Henry, what is your hardware?

That might help everyone search for bugs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:19    Post_subject:  

OK, I ran 2.13 a second time. It's still .3fs, and I had noticed that the first time it had copied zdrv_213.sfs to the hard drive. It starts quickly, runs Gimp, etc, but one lttle oddity - the grey screen is crosshatched until I choose the Xvesa setup from the menu ??

Well, it's progress of a sort.

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:31    Post_subject:  

OK, John Doe,

Here's a nutshell. I don't know how much detail is needed. I do note that every version prior to 2.13 worked fine on this hardware.

Number Processors 1
Processor Description AMD Duron(tm), 1597MHz
Total Memory 479MB
Total Hard Drive 149GB
Display Senergy 560, 15.2" (31cm x 23cm)
System Uptime 0 Days, 0 Hours, 14 Minutes
BIOS Version American Megatrends BBS V3.20 0402
User Name  
Timestamp 1/3/07 12:25:33 AM
 
Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:37    Post_subject:  

Here's the video, but again, I think that's a red herring since I had the same problems on another more modern computer.

Device Type Display adapters
Device Name  
Description NVIDIA GeForce4 MX Integrated GPU
Manufacturer NVIDIA
Driver Provider NVIDIA
Driver Date 12-27-2002
Status Code 0
Status Message OK

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
John Doe

Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Posts: 1689
Location: Michigan, US

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 04:51    Post_subject:  

Henry wrote:
...I think that's a red herring..


Perhaps. Although I'd say it's more of a discovery process.

Don't forget, the folks working on this want it to work as well for you as you'd like it to work. Sometimes these problems boil down to firmware versions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Lobster
Official Crustacean


Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 15117
Location: Paradox Realm

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 05:37    Post_subject:  

Confused

We need to sort this. I had a similar sort of experience. I was actually trying to create an unleashed from my first pristine boot of Puppy 2.13 . . .

I loaded from the new created distro
got a kernel panic message - OK (I barely know what I am doing so OK)

. . . then I tried running from 2.13 - same

OK I will boot from ram only with "pfix=ram"
SAME - kernel panic

Oh dear . . .
OK I need to boot from HD
to clear the .sfs (which it should not be picking up? Maybe it is picking up from a tmp file or .sfs on another partition - or something . . .)

My Grub from HD broken - oh dear . . .

I had a Pizzapup Alpha (based on 2.12) - no joy (again I got the message 'not synching - kernel panic')

My last resort was booting from a second CD copy of 2.13 (again with pfix=ram) and this time I was OK

So is the boot sequence searching through hard drives partitions (I think I have about 6) and picking up wrong instructions?

Sorry can not offer more help

_________________
Puppy WIKI
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 13:35    Post_subject:  

Thanks for sharing that, Lobster. I can appreciate it.

I have been checking and rechecking. You know how time-consuming that can be, but I have pretty good confidence that everything I reported above is correct, with this one exception
"but one lttle oddity - the grey screen is crosshatched until I choose the Xvesa setup from the menu ?", which was a finger fumble of mine. Forget it.

Also, I am confident that there are no stray instances of configuration files elsewhere on my four hard drive partitions or the one usb flash. (The 98se find function is worthless for this on large files, but I looked in all the plausible places and of course used gtkfind with all mounted.)

So, to recap:

1- I now have 2.13 final working with a simple dummy config file that was upgraded from 2.12 as a test and

2- I have my regular working 2.12 final with all tweaks. There seems to be no way to upgrade this to 2.13, as reported :(

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
BarryK
Puppy Master


Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 7047
Location: Perth, Western Australia

PostPosted: Wed 03 Jan 2007, 19:32    Post_subject:  

Henry wrote:

Oops, I just noticed that the config is still a .3fs Shouldn't that have been converted into a .2fs?

No. pup_save.3fs works fine in 2.13.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Henry

Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 829
Location: Oregon USA

PostPosted: Thu 04 Jan 2007, 14:00    Post_subject:  

Sorry to keep harping on this. I'm just a "user", but it probably could happen to someone else equally unable to fix it. So I have some questions -

Is there a way to examine or test the content of pup_sav.3fs to determine if there is some corruption or whatever that doesn't matter in the current version but prevents upgrading to the next?

Is a pup_sav "cleaner utility" feasible?

If I bit the bullet and started configuring over again in 2.13, is there any assurance that an upgrade to 2.14, etc will work? (Yes, I know - no guarantees, etc. but is this the plan?)

What is thought to be the cause of this - a bug, intolerance of package handling errors (of which I've encountered many), or what, and the outlook for preventing it? Yes, of course I understand that any file can be corrupted, becoming unusable, but if a configuration works in one version it should be (I think) usable in the next, at least to the point of being able to adapt it. It it won't run at all it's a show-stopper.

Thanks for your patience. I know and appreciate that Barry and others are doing superhuman work here that is greatly admired and appreciated. Just wondered what the thinking was on this. No one can expect prompt action on any specific issue. There are many other priorities.

Now I stand to be corrected or informed.

Henry
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 1 of 3 Posts_count   Goto page: 1, 2, 3 Next
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » House Training » Bugs ( Submit bugs )
Jump to:  

Rules_post_cannot
Rules_reply_cannot
Rules_edit_cannot
Rules_delete_cannot
Rules_vote_cannot
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0765s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0044s) ][ GZIP on ]