kernel compiling in woof-ce
framebuffer console for lucid 5.2.8.7
Lucid 5.2.8.7 (Dec 2016) with kernel 2.6 has fbcon and other required framebuffer modules.
Super Lucid 2 (kernel from Precise 5.7.1) also does, but halfway through boot, booted with vga=791 and with modprobe fbcon in /etc/rc.d/rc.local, the framebuffer console switches to plain 640x480.
I tried on two different laptops (both intel integrated graphics, 915GM, Xorg).
On one laptop I need kernel 3.2 or later for Xorg (and Xorg for mplayer).
Super Lucid 2 has 3.2 kernel. Super Lucid 3 and 4 have no console framebuffer support.
I use lynx in a terminal with fbi (framebuffer image viewer) as well as mplayer (to play DVDs).
Also much more text is visible at higher resolutions with framebuffer console.
Super Lucid 2 (kernel from Precise 5.7.1) also does, but halfway through boot, booted with vga=791 and with modprobe fbcon in /etc/rc.d/rc.local, the framebuffer console switches to plain 640x480.
I tried on two different laptops (both intel integrated graphics, 915GM, Xorg).
On one laptop I need kernel 3.2 or later for Xorg (and Xorg for mplayer).
Super Lucid 2 has 3.2 kernel. Super Lucid 3 and 4 have no console framebuffer support.
I use lynx in a terminal with fbi (framebuffer image viewer) as well as mplayer (to play DVDs).
Also much more text is visible at higher resolutions with framebuffer console.
-
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Mon 22 Feb 2016, 19:43
I noticed this warning (attached) when I was compiling with the latest woof-CE kernel-kit. I started over, making the "linux_kernel-3.14.79-slacko64" folder manually before pressing the Enter to continue this time, and did not get the message any more... though not sure if that's what I was supposed to do.
edit: Drats, I guess not, now I got this warning instead (attached). Back to square one...
edit: Drats, I guess not, now I got this warning instead (attached). Back to square one...
-
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Mon 22 Feb 2016, 19:43
Thanks stemsee. The issue has now been fixed at the woof-CE level. I uploaded the finished kernel here.
kernel compiling in woof-ce
3 kernel updates came out today, 4.10.9,4.9.21,and 4.4.60.Sailor Enceladus wrote:Thanks stemsee. The issue has now been fixed at the woof-CE level. I uploaded the finished kernel here.
Seems like they are updated once or twice a week.
Kernel configs
@Belham2 is having problems with 32-bit 4.9 etc kernels built with kernel-kit whereas he says he does not have problems with the 64-bit kernels
Comparing the 32-bit and 64-bit 4.9 configs from kernel-kit
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... onfigs_x86
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... igs_x86_64
there are quite a lot of differences - more than I would expect just for the difference in bit length....
Just wondering if anybody knows why they are so different and this thread seemed to be the best place to ask.
Also....
@Belham2 says he does have success with Slacko's 32-bit 3.14.78 kernel...
Comparing the kernel-kit configs for 32-bit 3.14 and 4.9 shows a huge number of differences.....
3.14 went EOL backend of 2016 and is no longer updated
3.16 has the longest life - see:
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html
but kernel-kit doesn't have a 3.16 config....
and there are no 3.16 kernels at:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/huge_kernels/
Shouldn't Puppy have a 32-bit 3.16 kernel? If so would it be best to base the config on the 3.14 one or on the 4.1 one (both currently in kernel-kit)??
Comparing the 32-bit and 64-bit 4.9 configs from kernel-kit
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... onfigs_x86
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... igs_x86_64
there are quite a lot of differences - more than I would expect just for the difference in bit length....
Just wondering if anybody knows why they are so different and this thread seemed to be the best place to ask.
Also....
@Belham2 says he does have success with Slacko's 32-bit 3.14.78 kernel...
Comparing the kernel-kit configs for 32-bit 3.14 and 4.9 shows a huge number of differences.....
3.14 went EOL backend of 2016 and is no longer updated
3.16 has the longest life - see:
https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html
but kernel-kit doesn't have a 3.16 config....
and there are no 3.16 kernels at:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/huge_kernels/
Shouldn't Puppy have a 32-bit 3.16 kernel? If so would it be best to base the config on the 3.14 one or on the 4.1 one (both currently in kernel-kit)??
LxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Update on kernel 3.16.....
Woof-ce kernel-kit does now have a config for 3.16.43 + the patches needed to aufs-3.16 to make it work with 3.16.35 onwards - see:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... 1e2f10cb47
Woof-ce kernel-kit does now have a config for 3.16.43 + the patches needed to aufs-3.16 to make it work with 3.16.35 onwards - see:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... 1e2f10cb47
LxPup = Puppy + LXDE
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
Main version used daily: LxPupSc; Assembler of UPups, ScPup & ScPup64, LxPup, LxPupSc & LxPupSc64
huge-4.10.11-x64 kernel package for try out! I used it on FD but kept locking up. Set to 1000mhz. Also exposes hardware to virtualised machine.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... DZreVJzTzA
sources
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... 29CZjNVMlk
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... DZreVJzTzA
sources
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... 29CZjNVMlk
Huge-kernel-4.10.11-PuPpY-32-pae
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... TFURjNjemc
sources
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... DVJV0NCQ0k
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... TFURjNjemc
sources
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... DVJV0NCQ0k
Thanks, stemsee.stemsee wrote:Huge-kernel-4.10.11-PuPpY-32-pae
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... TFURjNjemc
sources
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8-coZ ... DVJV0NCQ0k
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
How people will choose the kernel ?
How people will choose the kernel that is butter for their computer ? it would be useful to give information about one kernel does what another does not.
My LxPupXenial has some sounds problems, it seems only oss available in the kernel 4.5.2. How to know that before the choice, that is my question.
And what kernel will be choosen when iso released as public final version
My LxPupXenial has some sounds problems, it seems only oss available in the kernel 4.5.2. How to know that before the choice, that is my question.
And what kernel will be choosen when iso released as public final version
Hello all.
I agree with pelo on this one.
We developers can do research about a new kernel, but middle-of-the-road
users will appreciate finding a brief explanation of the features of any new
kernel and why it is better than the one published before it.
BFN.
I agree with pelo on this one.
We developers can do research about a new kernel, but middle-of-the-road
users will appreciate finding a brief explanation of the features of any new
kernel and why it is better than the one published before it.
BFN.
musher0
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
~~~~~~~~~~
"You want it darker? We kill the flame." (L. Cohen)
I ususally look here at the changelog
https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel ... og-4.10.11
http://news.softpedia.com/news/linux-ke ... 4952.shtml
https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel ... og-4.10.11
http://news.softpedia.com/news/linux-ke ... 4952.shtml
-
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Mon 22 Feb 2016, 19:43