Having followed this list for a couple of weeks, and successfully installed 10.0 in a test partition, I decided to install 10.1 from the Linux Magazine DVD in the same partition. The install was fairly intuitive, though I was concerned that the expected GRUB placement option did not appear, so I aborted and tried again, this time looking in "expert", where there seemed to be confirmation that GRUB would go in hda3, where I wanted it. Further down the track, in hardware configuration, the graphics card entry read "no proposal", and an error was flagged. But as the installer seemed to have no problems with my graphics card I went ahead. The update found only two very minor items, so I added Zen, rug, and the Audacity I needed to test as a priority. Problem 1: The installation finished, but instead of KDE I was presented with a command line login, presumably due to the graphics card error. Somewhat cheesed off, I rebooted. Problem 2: in spite of the appearance of having put GRUB in hda3, the install had evidently put it in the MBR of hda, wiping the previous GRUB that booted my everyday FC4 on hdc. Not Nice. Having rebuilt GRUB I am back in FC4. I had intended to move to SUSE 10.1 instead of FC5, but now I am considering Kubuntu Dapper, which successfully upgraded from Breezy online. I have yet to trawl the archives for a solution to these two problems, and it is far too late at night here in the antipodes to start now. The graphics card one sounds familiar, but the GRUB issue is new to me. Every other install I have done has been very clear as to where GRUB is to go, though FC4 consistently failed to put it anywhere, so fortunately I had kept notes on how to create it. I have been very impressed by the quality of the correspondence on this list, so I hope I can find solutions and continue to run SUSE into the future. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 10:51 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
Having followed this list for a couple of weeks, and successfully installed ... cut 100% installer issues ...
Installer ... installer ... installer issue. That's all I'm seeing, in addition to update (which affects the installer too) and legal issues (which is nothing new for us Debian or Fedora-based users). The more bug reports people submit with their _exact_ configuration, the more configurations Novell-SuSE can integration/regression test for the 10.2 beta. Please do so if you have not yet. ;-> There are a _lot_ of distros out there that focus on installer issues and cut through the legal red tape. Which makes them a PITA from an enterprise configuration management (ECM) standpoint once they are running (don't get me started), let alone I have to bar them from the corporation for indemnification purposes. For regular users that don't care about maintaining consistency in an enterprise or the legal issues and they just "want it to install," then maybe those other distros are for you. But I'll take Debian, Fedora and, increasingly, SuSE-based distros anyday because they don't. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------- Illegal Immigration = "Representation Without Taxation" -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On 12/06/06, Bryan J. Smith
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 10:51 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
Having followed this list for a couple of weeks, and successfully installed ... cut 100% installer issues ...
Installer ... installer ... installer issue. That's all I'm seeing, in addition to update (which affects the installer too) and legal issues (which is nothing new for us Debian or Fedora-based users).
The more bug reports people submit with their _exact_ configuration, the more configurations Novell-SuSE can integration/regression test for the 10.2 beta. Please do so if you have not yet. ;->
There are a _lot_ of distros out there that focus on installer issues and cut through the legal red tape. Which makes them a PITA from an enterprise configuration management (ECM) standpoint once they are running (don't get me started), let alone I have to bar them from the corporation for indemnification purposes.
For regular users that don't care about maintaining consistency in an enterprise or the legal issues and they just "want it to install," then maybe those other distros are for you. But I'll take Debian, Fedora and, increasingly, SuSE-based distros anyday because they don't.
Bryan, I think you are forgetting that these are people who are used to SuSE in the same way that you are used to Fedora or Debian. They (and me) are simply not used to and should not expect these 'installer' issues. In a distro' as normally polished as SuSE has become it should not happen and is a first point stumbling block to getting further, everyday user information and possible minor bugs. I had hoped to install SuSE 10.1 myself today but unfortunately life intruded. Hopefully I'll try it tomorrow and see how it goes. Wish me luck :-) -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== PLEASE DON'T drink and drive it's not clever, it's just stupid. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 20:09 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
Bryan, I think you are forgetting that these are people who are used to SuSE in the same way that you are used to Fedora or Debian. They (and me) are simply not used to and should not expect these 'installer' issues. In a distro' as normally polished as SuSE has become it should not happen and is a first point stumbling block to getting further, everyday user information and possible minor bugs. I had hoped to install SuSE 10.1 myself today but unfortunately life intruded. Hopefully I'll try it tomorrow and see how it goes.
I've been deploying SLES since SLES 7, and I've also installed, supported and even built RPMS (i.e., writing the SPEC file) for SuSE Linux 7.x, 8.x and 9.x too. I just admit that I use and support RHEL and Fedora Core more. Every distro has its installer quirks. SuSE Linux has had it's share too. I don't see anything abnormal with SuSE Linux 10.1, other than the updater -- which has been admitted to. But the installer isn't the distro. If I sat and installed distros all day, over and over, I wouldn't use Linux. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------- Illegal Immigration = "Representation Without Taxation" -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On 12/06/06, Bryan J. Smith
If I sat and installed distros all day, over and over, I wouldn't use Linux.
Nah, don't believe you :-))))))))) there is worse, I've spent weeks installing one Microsoft system after another. All exactly the same machines with many different outcomes????? -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== PLEASE DON'T drink and drive it's not clever, it's just stupid. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 22:27 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
Nah, don't believe you :-))))))))) there is worse, I've spent weeks installing one Microsoft system after another. All exactly the same machines with many different outcomes?????
No, you missed some of my point. One is that I don't install Linux, I use it. The other is that I don't have to re-install it, hence why I don't use Windows, because I consistently do. But you are correct, I have _no_control_ over Windows with Enterprise Configuration Management (ECM) because any install can be different. At least with Linux, I can expect the exact same outcome on the same hardware. So once I have a test install in-place, I can roll it out to _all_ the same hardware without issue from a YUM or other repository. Individual PC installs will always be an issue -- especially with a lot of "superstore hardware" out there. -- Bryan J. Smith Professional, technical annoyance mailto:b.j.smith@ieee.org http://thebs413.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------- Illegal Immigration = "Representation Without Taxation" -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Andy Goss wrote:
Further down the track, in hardware configuration, the graphics card entry read "no proposal", and an error was flagged. But as the installer seemed to have no problems with my graphics card I went ahead.
Do you have more than one graphics card in that system? I hit a problem recently when I had two ATI Rage IID in the same box - and I also got the "no proposal". (see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177621). I then ran SAX2 separately afterwards, specifying which of the two cards I wanted to use, and it worked fine.
Problem 1: The installation finished, but instead of KDE I was presented with a command line login, presumably due to the graphics card error. Somewhat cheesed off, I rebooted.
Yes, your X-system was not set up at all.
Problem 2: in spite of the appearance of having put GRUB in hda3, the install had evidently put it in the MBR of hda, wiping the previous GRUB that booted my everyday FC4 on hdc. Not Nice.
Worth reporting as a bug. I don't use GRUB, but have sofar not had any problems with lilo in this respect. Given that GRUB is the default, I'm surprised to hear of any bugs in that area at all.
Having rebuilt GRUB I am back in FC4. I had intended to move to SUSE 10.1 instead of FC5, but now I am considering Kubuntu Dapper, which successfully upgraded from Breezy online.
You've had one significant and one very minor problem and now you're considering alternatives. I'm a long time SUSE user - it would me take a lot more than that to start considering alternatives, but you're certainly right in being critical. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 13:19 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Further down the track, in hardware configuration, the graphics card entry read "no proposal", and an error was flagged. But as the installer seemed to have no problems with my graphics card I went ahead.
Do you have more than one graphics card in that system? I hit a problem recently when I had two ATI Rage IID in the same box - and I also got the "no proposal". (see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177621). I then ran SAX2 separately afterwards, specifying which of the two cards I wanted to use, and it worked fine.
Problem 1: The installation finished, but instead of KDE I was presented with a command line login, presumably due to the graphics card error. Somewhat cheesed off, I rebooted.
Yes, your X-system was not set up at all.
Problem 2: in spite of the appearance of having put GRUB in hda3, the install had evidently put it in the MBR of hda, wiping the previous GRUB that booted my everyday FC4 on hdc. Not Nice.
Worth reporting as a bug. I don't use GRUB, but have sofar not had any problems with lilo in this respect. Given that GRUB is the default, I'm surprised to hear of any bugs in that area at all.
Having rebuilt GRUB I am back in FC4. I had intended to move to SUSE 10.1 instead of FC5, but now I am considering Kubuntu Dapper, which successfully upgraded from Breezy online.
You've had one significant and one very minor problem and now you're considering alternatives. I'm a long time SUSE user - it would me take a lot more than that to start considering alternatives, but you're certainly right in being critical.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Thanks Per. My FC4 only sees one graphics card, and does not appear to have sax2, but I will follow this up as the symptoms are identical. I'll check bugzilla for the GRUB problem and file a bug if appropriate. I have been considering a number of distros to replace FC4 as a long term working desktop, SUSE 10.1 and Kubuntu Dapper are the finalists. Both are recent releases, both have stellar ambitions. My inclination is towards SUSE for the long haul as it has an excellent reputation and has built up a loyal and knowledgeable user base, so I shall not be giving up yet. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 13:19 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Problem 2: in spite of the appearance of having put GRUB in hda3, the install had evidently put it in the MBR of hda, wiping the previous GRUB that booted my everyday FC4 on hdc. Not Nice.
Worth reporting as a bug. I don't use GRUB, but have sofar not had any problems with lilo in this respect. Given that GRUB is the default, I'm surprised to hear of any bugs in that area at all.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
This looks exactly like https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=159377 which is in "needinfo" status. My info looks identical but I'll send it in anyway. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:12 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 13:19 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Problem 2: in spite of the appearance of having put GRUB in hda3, the install had evidently put it in the MBR of hda, wiping the previous GRUB that booted my everyday FC4 on hdc. Not Nice.
Worth reporting as a bug. I don't use GRUB, but have sofar not had any problems with lilo in this respect. Given that GRUB is the default, I'm surprised to hear of any bugs in that area at all.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
This looks exactly like https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=159377
which is in "needinfo" status. My info looks identical but I'll send it in anyway.
Andy Goss
Looking at the bug report again it may be that both I and the bug reporter missed a setting, the checkbox "Activate bootloader partition". My hda3 partition seems to have been made bootable - an "*" in the fdisk list. This does not seem to have any practical effect, though if I ever wanted to fire up the old 98SE on hda1 I might have a problem. 10.1 is still activated from my main GRUB menu, but the SUSE graphical boot menu dumps me to a CLI login - different problem. I'll leave this until I get the graphics card error fixed. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 13:19 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Further down the track, in hardware configuration, the graphics card entry read "no proposal", and an error was flagged. But as the installer seemed to have no problems with my graphics card I went ahead.
Do you have more than one graphics card in that system? I hit a problem recently when I had two ATI Rage IID in the same box - and I also got the "no proposal". (see https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177621). I then ran SAX2 separately afterwards, specifying which of the two cards I wanted to use, and it worked fine.
Problem 1: The installation finished, but instead of KDE I was presented with a command line login, presumably due to the graphics card error. Somewhat cheesed off, I rebooted.
Yes, your X-system was not set up at all.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
sax2 -p shows I have one card, an Intel i845, so it is not quite the same bug as 177621, and it definitely did work in 10.0 - still does in Kubuntu and FC4. I'll try a few things, collect the details and log it. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Andy Goss wrote:
sax2 -p shows I have one card, an Intel i845, so it is not quite the same bug as 177621, and it definitely did work in 10.0 - still does in Kubuntu and FC4. I'll try a few things, collect the details and log it.
Andy Goss
Andy, The sax2 shows ?! What shows your knowledge about the system, how many cards are in there? I use dual screen (xinerama) and second screen showed up after bug $171453 was resolved and patch applied (installed). -- Regards, Rajko. Visit http://en.opensuse.org -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 04:27 -0500, Rajko M wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
sax2 -p shows I have one card, an Intel i845, so it is not quite the same bug as 177621, and it definitely did work in 10.0 - still does in Kubuntu and FC4. I'll try a few things, collect the details and log it.
Andy Goss
Andy,
The sax2 shows ?! What shows your knowledge about the system, how many cards are in there?
I use dual screen (xinerama) and second screen showed up after bug $171453 was resolved and patch applied (installed).
-- Regards, Rajko. Visit http://en.opensuse.org
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device". The symptoms are identical to Bug 177621, but there is no sign of any other card. I only use one screen. Unfortunately I have deadlines looming so further investigation will have to wait a few days. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Andy Goss wrote:
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device".
lspci will show you exactly what kind of chip you've got installed. What does "hwinfo --framebuffer" say? You could also try configuring the card manually using sax2 - just run "sax2 -r". I would expect to see some error messages - also check /var/log/Sax.log - that might have some clues. All of this would also be good diags for a bugreport if it turns out your graphics card/chip really isn't supported. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:56 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
lspci will show you exactly what kind of chip you've got installed.
What does "hwinfo --framebuffer" say?
You could also try configuring the card manually using sax2 - just run "sax2 -r". I would expect to see some error messages - also check /var/log/Sax.log - that might have some clues.
All of this would also be good diags for a bugreport if it turns out your graphics card/chip really isn't supported.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
Thanks, Per. I have to concentrate on paying work for a while, but I will pursue this and post back the results. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:56 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device".
lspci will show you exactly what kind of chip you've got installed.
What does "hwinfo --framebuffer" say?
You could also try configuring the card manually using sax2 - just run "sax2 -r". I would expect to see some error messages - also check /var/log/Sax.log - that might have some clues.
All of this would also be good diags for a bugreport if it turns out your graphics card/chip really isn't supported.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
******* Both "live" options do the same - give me a command line login
******* lspci -vv shows:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation
82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03)
(prog-if 00 [VGA])
Subsystem: Giga-byte Technology Unknown device 2562
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr-
Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort-
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 18:34 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:56 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device".
lspci will show you exactly what kind of chip you've got installed.
What does "hwinfo --framebuffer" say?
You could also try configuring the card manually using sax2 - just run "sax2 -r". I would expect to see some error messages - also check /var/log/Sax.log - that might have some clues.
All of this would also be good diags for a bugreport if it turns out your graphics card/chip really isn't supported.
/Per Jessen, Zürich
******* Both "live" options do the same - give me a command line login
******* lspci -vv shows:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
******* hwinfo --all gives:
bios.4.1: vbe infoBus error
******* sax2 -r said: " SaX: initializing please wait... SaX: your current configuration will not be read in
[?25h[?0cSaX: no X-Server is running SaX: will start own server if needed " and then:
"died at /usr/share/sax/init.pl line 619"
******* /var/log/Xorg.0.log says:
X Window System Version 6.9.0 Release Date: 21 December 2005 X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 6.9 Build Operating System: SuSE Linux [ELF] SuSE Current Operating System: Linux linux-9t89 2.6.16.13-4-default #1 Wed May 3 04:53:23 UTC 2006 i686 Build Date: 02 May 2006 Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.X.Org to make sure that you have the latest version. Module Loader present Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. (==) Log file: "/var/log/Xorg.0.log", Time: Thu Jun 22 17:21:31 2006 (==) Using config file: "/etc/X11/xorg.conf" Data incomplete in file /etc/X11/xorg.conf At least one Device section is required. (EE) Problem parsing the config file (EE) Error parsing the config file
Fatal server error: no screens found
Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support at http://wiki.X.Org for help. Please also check the log file at "/var/log/Xorg.0.log" for additional information.
******* and that's all
Is it worth trying any of the other install options?
******* In the y2log I find the line:
2006-06-12 14:50:21 <2> linux(3782) [qt-ui] YQUI_x11.cc(loadPredefinedQtTranslations):421 Can't load translations for predefined Qt dialogs from /usr/lib/qt3/translations/qt_en.qm
and
2006-06-12 18:14:56 <3> linux-9t89(3782) [YCP] clients/inst_proposal.ycp:396 Write() failed for submodule x11_proposal
******* What conclusions can be drawn from this lot?
-- Andy Goss
Now logged as Bug 188839, looks like 177621 but only one graphics card. -- Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 17:47 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 18:34 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:56 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device".
******* Both "live" options do the same - give me a command line login
******* lspci -vv shows:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
******* hwinfo --all gives:
bios.4.1: vbe infoBus error
Now logged as Bug 188839, looks like 177621 but only one graphics card.
-- Andy Goss
Bug resolved: "Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken. I've fixed it for 10.2." So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives. My thanks, good gentlemen of SUSE, for your prompt and efficient investigation. -- Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Andy Goss wrote:
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
My thanks, good gentlemen of SUSE, for your prompt and efficient investigation.
And, I believe it's worth adding, your persistency. It's simply the only way to get some of these rare, yet annoying bugs fixed. /Per Jessen, Zürich Now alpha-testing 10.2. -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
To SLE and Andy Goss: I have to agree with you. I had to retrograde to 9.2 Pro to be able to use my SuSe at all. Of course, I am on my Windows box right now, which I have kept for when I get frustrated at Linux!! Andy Goss wrote:
On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 17:47 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 18:34 +1000, Andy Goss wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 16:56 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Andy Goss wrote:
Prior to converting to Linux, I established that the one and only video card is an "Intel 82845G/GL/GE/PE/GV Graphics Controller Revision 003". sax2 -p shows me an Intel i845 (plus some numbers I did not note down, I am currently in FC4 which has not heard of sax2) FC4's hardware browser shows me an "Intel 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device".
******* Both "live" options do the same - give me a command line login
******* lspci -vv shows:
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 03) Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
******* hwinfo --all gives:
bios.4.1: vbe infoBus error
Now logged as Bug 188839, looks like 177621 but only one graphics card.
-- Andy Goss
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
My thanks, good gentlemen of SUSE, for your prompt and efficient investigation.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 18:38 -0700, John Boyle wrote:
To SLE and Andy Goss: I have to agree with you. I had to retrograde to 9.2 Pro to be able to use my SuSe at all. Of course, I am on my Windows box right now, which I have kept for when I get frustrated at Linux!!
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
My thanks, good gentlemen of SUSE, for your prompt and efficient investigation.
I have four Linux distros and no Windows. I take frequent backups and can be pretty sure I can get something to work if I stuff up badly. FC4 is my workhorse on one drive, with Vector 5.1, SUSE 10.1, and Ubuntu/Kubuntu 6.06 as experimental installs on the other. Currently only Kubuntu seems to work, and I have not had a chance to check it out properly yet. I might try SUSE 10.0 again, as I was sufficiently impressed by it to want 10.1. I was surprised at the extent that simple things that worked on 10.0 did not on 10.1, I have seen a number of posts from people who have had similar experiences. I assume some radical re-thinking of the underpinnings has been going on. As an ex-programmer I can appreciate that what looks like a nice solid product to the end user may be a horrible mess of fudges underneath, and that in replacing it with a good fundamental design and maintainable structure a few problems will appear. I saw a quote pinned up once; "If you don't have time to do it properly, do you have time to do it again?" Which bears thinking about. Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Saturday 01 July 2006 03:50, Andy Goss wrote:
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
Can the video BIOS be updated for that board? Maybe that would fix the checksum problem... Could you contact Intel? -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 08:36 +0300, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
On Saturday 01 July 2006 03:50, Andy Goss wrote:
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
Can the video BIOS be updated for that board? Maybe that would fix the checksum problem... Could you contact Intel?
Possibly, but the installer should be able to cope with it, as 10.0 did, and every other distro I have installed, hence the fix in 10.2. I have just been down to my friendly local computer shop (Free plug for PC City, Croydon, Victoria, Australia) and bought a secondhand graphics card, which I will try sometime in the next few days. -- Andy Goss -- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Monday 03 July 2006 15:46, Andy Goss wrote:
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 08:36 +0300, Silviu Marin-Caea wrote:
On Saturday 01 July 2006 03:50, Andy Goss wrote:
Bug resolved:
"Your video BIOS does not pass the checksum test (and for good reason, as the bus error you see proves). hwinfo is expected to switch to using the cpu emulation in such cases - but, as it turned out, the code for this was broken.
I've fixed it for 10.2."
So its a new graphics card, wait for 10.2 Final, or try 10.2 Alpha 2 when it arrives.
Can the video BIOS be updated for that board? Maybe that would fix the checksum problem... Could you contact Intel?
Possibly, but the installer should be able to cope with it, as 10.0 did, and every other distro I have installed, hence the fix in 10.2. I have just been down to my friendly local computer shop (Free plug for PC City, Croydon, Victoria, Australia) and bought a secondhand graphics card, which I will try sometime in the next few days. -- Andy Goss
All the Intel updates were for Windows or DOS, and about as old as the mobo anyway. The graphics card was a bit of a disaster - kernel panics all round - but by my typically slow and roundabout thought processes I reckoned that installing 10.0, which I knew would work, and then upgrading to 10.1, might do the job, as I could see no reason why an upgrade would need to re-identify the hardware. And I was right! SUSE 10.1 is an all-round improvement on Fedora Core 4, with the exception of one problem - cdrecord won't write to DVD, I think I need to use growisofs instead. Andy Goss
participants (8)
-
Andy -
Andy Goss
-
Bryan J. Smith -
John Boyle -
Kevanf1 -
Per Jessen -
Rajko M -
Silviu Marin-Caea