Fedora 12 Alpha questions

[pedora]

I tried a LiveCD of Fedora 12 Alpha on my Thinkpad (so it's the Fedora 12 x86 version) T41 that has ATI mobility 9000 card. I figure I should mention the card in case that contributes to any issue.

Anyway, the loading during boot was especially long or so I think. It took a while to load. Any issues with this so far? Or is there something I need to do? I was just curious. Other than that, it seemed okay once I got to the desktop. The load up time is troubling, though. I didn't time it but it seemed extra long even for a Live CD version.

[glennzo]

I experienced the same thing this morning with one of the Live CD's. Took 10 minutes, literally, to boot and never got to the desktop or a log in prompt. I turned the computer off and threw the disk into the trash. I've experienced the same behavior several times in the recent past with different Fedora Live disks. But it's not just Fedora. The latest Ubuntu releases like 8 and 9 have taken an eternity to boot. I have 2GB ram so I don't think memory is the issue.

[bob]

(moved to Fedora 12 Alpha Beta)

[pedora]

I experienced the same thing this morning with one of the Live CD's. Took 10 minutes, literally, to boot and never got to the desktop or a log in prompt. I turned the computer off and threw the disk into the trash. I've experienced the same behavior several times in the recent past with different Fedora Live disks. But it's not just Fedora. The latest Ubuntu releases like 8 and 9 have taken an eternity to boot. I have 2GB ram so I don't think memory is the issue.
First of all, I apologize in general for posting in the wrong section. I guess I should have searched more to find the most appropriate section.

Second, thanks for the reply. Honestly, I find this forum to be particularly good for quick replies or at least, getting replies.

Okay, now to your response. I was able to boot.... eventually. I got to the gdm (Gnome Desktop Manager) or Gnome desktop fine. But, like you confirmed, it took an eternity to finally get there. Not sure why.

I do somewhat disagree with the comparison to Ubuntu's latest Alpha, however. I'm not trying to convey a preference at all but it didn't take as long to boot up. However, I sure will criticize Ubuntu's Live CD as their Alpha 5 Live CD did boot up quicker and I got to the gdm but it froze there not long after. I am not sure how long I was able to check it out but it seemed like only 5 minutes or so but suddenly, everything just froze. I was using the same laptop, too. I am not proficient in Linux as there may be some two or three key strokes that get you out of the crash but I decided to reboot (turned laptop off and on). I haven't been able to locate any similar crashes but I'm sure a lot of people have Thinkpads and install Ubuntu on them.

I did like the appearance of Fedora but the boot time is way too slow right now. I hope there is a significant improvement for the release.

Thanks for replying! :)

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_Alpha_release_notes#Debugging_Informatio n_And_Performance

[foxdoismil]

Is it possible to disable the debug options that impact performance ? How?
Is it possible to install/run older Fedora 11 kernel and avoid the performance issues?

[RahulSundaram]

Hi,

If you care about performance, you shouldn't be running development distributions.

[foxdoismil]

I am getting a Bacula 3 try and only F12 has it. I have no other way.
But F12 is way toooo slowww (and a few bugs I did not see in F11, but that may be related to its alpha state)

I am using virtualbox for the tests. I also installed Kubuntu and Debian and they both are much faster than Fedora 11 (that is NOT alpha), and should perform faster. (Fedora 11 is faster than Fedora 12 alpha, but not as fast as the others).

So, again, I would be grate if someone could point me the tweaks needed to increase Fedora speed.

Thanks

[jvillain]

RahulSundaram didn't just say that to waste his breath. In these releases they aren't necessarily setting the compiler options for speed, memory use or size. They do set the debugging flag though so that they get useful back traces to help them find where in the code errors are occurring. And no you can not turn off the debugging as it is baked in. Having said that I am not experiencing any issues with any of my installs and I have it on 5 different machines. Bacula is working great BTW.

You should trouble shoot your performance issues the same way you normally would. Make sure as many services are turned off as possible, run top etc, etc. There is no performance button to click. If there was don't you think it would always be set?

[pedora]

So developers don't want users to test the Betas, Alphas, or whatever state/status of development the latest edition is in?

The other poster pointed out a release is SLOWER. The point is, currently, the Live version is INCREDIBLY slow to boot up. There are issues/problems. The previous release is slower than other distros and I am not sure why no one would want some feedback on this.

[typerlc]

The point is, currently, the Live version is INCREDIBLY slow to boot up. There are issues/problems. The previous release is slower than other distros and I am not sure why no one would want some feedback on this.

The reason it is slow is that the applications are compiled with debugging info, and additional checks that slow the execution of the o/s, and applications. This aids in the pinpointing of problems if they occur. The down-side is the speed degradation.

At this stage in the development cycle, the emphasis is on getting things working. When that has been reliably achieved, they will presumably remove these debugging aids, and the o/s will again speed up.

For me, running FC12 natively from HD (not live cd, and not in VM), bootup is around 30 seconds. Seems ok to me ... even for an alpha/beta release.

The apparent slowness of the live cd may be to do with the size of the applications ... they will be bigger when compiled for debugging. This size difference will be noticed much more on slow media like CD/DVD.

Basically, I don't see a problem, and when FC12 is past this debugging phase, you shouldn't either. Prematurely asking for speedups will not get you anywhere.

[pedora]

Well, I was just commenting on the Live edition.

Also, I didn't mention it but I also got a kernel crash. This is after it boots up to the desktop. I have the option to click to report. I was just curious what's that about.

[Demz]

Well, I was just commenting on the Live edition.

Also, I didn't mention it but I also got a kernel crash. This is after it boots up to the desktop. I have the option to click to report. I was just curious what's that about.

what kinda kernel crash? thats not enough information

[User]

@Pedora - have you tried using your laptop for a longer time? Can you tell me if the laptop becomes hot?
I have Fedora alpha installed on a Thinkpad T60p and is running very hot in a short while.

You can run the "Hardware Sensors Monitor" applet in Gnome and you can see the temperatures. If it's possible please post all of them here.
Thank you.

[pedora]

what kinda kernel crash? thats not enough information
Okay, it's actually a 'failure.'

Message is as follows:

Your system had a kernel failure. [x]
There is diagnostic information available for this failure. Do you want to submit this information to the www.kerneloops.org website for use by the Linux kernel devleopers?
[Always] [Yes] [No] [Never] [Show Details]

You can run the "Hardware Sensors Monitor" applet in Gnome and you can see the temperatures. If it's possible please post all of them here.
Thank you.
But, my specs will be different. My Thinkpad is a T41. I have the ATI Radeon Mobility 9000 video card. Yours is probably Nvidia or Intel? My processors is also slower.

Anyway, if it helps: HDD 29, GPU 46, CPU 40 degrees - all in Celsius.

I don't know if those are satisfactory or not or if they are even accurate.

[Demz]

just wondering but have you tried downloading the LiveCD of Snap3 ?

[User]

Thanks Pedora.
My temperatures are bigger with about 20 degrees C, in some cases with 30C...
I guess something is fishy.

[Debroyston]

The reason it is slow is that the applications are compiled with debugging info, and additional checks that slow the execution of the o/s, and applications. This aids in the pinpointing of problems if they occur. The down-side is the speed degradation.

At this stage in the development cycle, the emphasis is on getting things working. When that has been reliably achieved, they will presumably remove these debugging aids, and the o/s will again speed up.

For me, running FC12 natively from HD (not live cd, and not in VM), bootup is around 30 seconds. Seems ok to me ... even for an alpha/beta release.

The apparent slowness of the live cd may be to do with the size of the applications ... they will be bigger when compiled for debugging. This size difference will be noticed much more on slow media like CD/DVD.

Basically, I don't see a problem, and when FC12 is past this debugging phase, you shouldn't either. Prematurely asking for speedups will not get you anywhere.

What version of F12 have you managed to install to hdd?
I ahve tried several versions without any success.

[leigh123linux]

What version of F12 have you managed to install to hdd?
I ahve tried several versions without any success.


I have managed to install this version :cool:

http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/mash/F12-Beta-TC/

Now all I need is a kernel that works with the nvidia driver. :(
I guess I will need to DIY :cool:


http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1704060

[Debroyston]

Thanks leigh123.
I will try to download the DVD early tomorrow morning. The evenings here are impossible-little better than dial-up.

[Debroyston]

I tried your download leigh123 but again with the same results. Either a black screen ora bug/software failure.
I have a Asus P5E3 motherboard, Intel E8200 CPU with 2Gb of RAM. The graphics card uses Nvidia GeForce 8500GT chipset. do I need to change something?

[RahulSundaram]

Hi,

You might want to try booting with mode setting off. Details at

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F12_bugs#Hardware-related_issues

[GoinEasy9]

Thanks for the F12-Beta-TC link Leigh, I finally have a working F12.

[Debroyston]

I tried the F12 alpha DVD download. After adding nouveau.modeset=0 3 the system ran the installation and after customizing the desktop environment the file installation went OK except that, as far as I could see, the files were downloaded from the rawhide server rather than the DVD.
Rebooted and disaster! The following message appeared:-
"Kernel panic - not syncing:VFS| Unable to mount root fs unknown-block (0,0)2
what is that all about, and can I recover from this?

[typerlc]

What version of F12 have you managed to install to hdd?
I ahve tried several versions without any success.

It's an upgrade from fc11 rawhide. i.e. I have continued updating since then.

[pedora]

When enabling desktop effects (Alpha 12, Gnome desktop), the screen goes black and then a second or two later, the login screen displays. Checking the desktop effects settings shows that it's back to default or not enabled. Anyone know what is happening?

[RahulSundaram]

Hi,

Desktop effects would only work if your driver supports acceleration. What display card/chipset do you have?

[pedora]

I tried a LiveCD of Fedora 12 Alpha on my Thinkpad (so it's the Fedora 12 x86 version) T41 that has ATI mobility 9000 card. I figure I should mention the card in case that contributes to any issue.

:rolleyes::(

Full specs?: ATI Technologies Inc Radeon RV250 [Mobility FireGL 9000] (rev 02)

[pedora]

Does Fedora have an equivalent package of 'linux-firmware?'' I couldn't find any evidence of one and this applies or includes the other rpm-based distros. Is this specific to Debian-based distros only?

I'll explain why I would want to find out and use it afterwards.

[RahulSundaram]

# yum search firmware

It is called kernel-firmware in Fedora since that is the upstream name.

[Zanpactou]

If your machine becomes very slow and takes ages to boot, it smacks of an acpi + memory allocation problem.
To solve it here I use the kernel parameter :
mem=1001M
There is actually 1024M (1GB of RAM) Installed on the machine, memtest86+ says there is 1015M and the kernel won't accept anything other than 1001M to boot correctly.
It's the whole acpi thing regarding specs. Intel released theirs (Used in the kernel) Microsoft never did but that didn't stop manufacturers implementing it.
Microsoft deliberately made their acpi spec to be holey unfriendly with Linux, hence the acpi problems that are common for some.

So try the mem= option, it might solve your problem. It's definitely worth a try.

[pedora]

If your machine becomes very slow and takes ages to boot, it smacks of an acpi + memory allocation problem.
To solve it here I use the kernel parameter :
mem=1001M
There is actually 1024M (1GB of RAM) Installed on the machine, memtest86+ says there is 1015M and the kernel won't accept anything other than 1001M to boot correctly.
It's the whole acpi thing regarding specs. Intel released theirs (Used in the kernel) Microsoft never did but that didn't stop manufacturers implementing it.
Microsoft deliberately made their acpi spec to be holey unfriendly with Linux, hence the acpi problems that are common for some.

So try the mem= option, it might solve your problem. It's definitely worth a try.
Okay, I admit I have newbie skills so where would I modify this and use this setting?

# yum search firmware

It is called kernel-firmware in Fedora since that is the upstream name.
Thanks, Rahul!
That's perfect - exactly what I was looking for!

[Zanpactou]

Use the live cd. Press the tab key until a prompt appears at the lower half of the screen. Work out how much ram you have (And if it's like mine, the exact amount won't work - see my example I posted) Then type :
mem=1001M
but change 1001 to the amount of memory your machine has.

If it doesn't make any difference, do as I did and try a lower number until it does. If after five or six lower numbers, you don't see any difference, it's not going to solve your problem and what you are experiencing is different.

If specifying mem= does speed up the boot process, then edit /boot/grub/menu.lst and add it to the very end of the kernel command line.
If you want to understand more or are unsure, read the Linux kernel documentation regarding kernel parameters and also the grub documentation if you want to use it every boot.

[AdamW]

pedora: there were known to be serious problems with the 3D support on Radeon chips in the Alpha. If you wait for the Beta, or try a nightly live CD from http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/nightly-composes/desktop/ , you should find it works fine.

[robatino]

What happened to the windows preference tool (System/Preferences/Windows) in F12 Alpha/Beta? I would like to have focus follows mouse.

[AdamW]

robatino: not sure what happened to the app, but you can set the preferences in gconf - apps/metacity/general .

[robatino]

Thanks. I installed the gconf-editor package, then went to apps/metacity/general and set "focus_mode" to "sloppy", as it is in F11. Maybe this should be in the release notes?

[AdamW]

well, I'm not entirely sure what the full story is, so I wouldn't know what to write yet...

[AdamW]

aha, we have progress: it's been moved into control-center-extra (yes, just 'extra', not 'extras'). I'll check if this has got into the release notes.

[GoinEasy9]

I just noticed that the Main Menu editing tool is missing in F12. It used to be under System --> Preferences. It would come in handy now since I installed kde and gnome on the same install. I'd like to block out some duplicates, like the screensaver apps. Both kde & gnome appear in the System --> Preferences Menu. They are both called Screensaver. It would be nice to have the actual name of the app under or next to or replace the name on the menu. If there is another way of doing this that I haven't found, I'd be glad to hear it.

TIA

[AdamW]

it's called 'alacarte'. It should be under System -> Preferences -> Main Menu (it may have been renamed, I guess). It's there on my F12 system.

[GoinEasy9]

Thanks AdamW, it wasn't on my F12. I found it in Add/Remove Software.

[robatino]

aha, we have progress: it's been moved into control-center-extra (yes, just 'extra', not 'extras'). I'll check if this has got into the release notes.

That's even better - after installing control-center-extra, the old windows preference tool is back, same as before.

[GoinEasy9]

Hey, I was missing that too .. gotta keep looking at this thread. Thanks all.