Fedora Linux Support Community & Resources Center

Go Back   FedoraForum.org > Fedora Resources > Guides & Solutions (No Questions)
FedoraForum Search

Forgot Password? Join Us!

Guides & Solutions (No Questions) Post your guides here (No links to Blogs accepted). You can also append your comments/questions to a guide, but don't start a new thread to ask a question. Use another forum for that.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 23rd June 2009, 10:03 PM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Fedora 11 on the Eee PC 901/1000

With the official release of Fedora 11, I decided to make an updated tutorial on how to install it and configure it on the Eee PC 901/1000. You can find the tutorial and packages on the fedora-eee website. I just started this thread for Eee PC-specific F11 troubleshooting and any questions or remarks regarding the procedure or packages.

Enjoy
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24th June 2009, 12:48 PM
karlpiuemeno Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Kernel
Age: 28
Posts: 108
I just tried your new kernel for F11 ... it's not good for my eeepc 701: it's slower to boot (I have an acpi conflict) and p4_clockmod is missing.... I'm back to fedora stable kernel.. maybe it's better for atom powered eeepcs
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25th June 2009, 01:26 PM
macs Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 19
@Quasar8000

I´ve installed your kernel and it seems to be a little bit slower in my 901.
__________________
[]'s macs
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25th June 2009, 03:00 PM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by macs View Post
@Quasar8000

I´ve installed your kernel and it seems to be a little bit slower in my 901.
You mean slower than the stock kernel or slower than F10 used to be?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 25th June 2009, 04:10 PM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
I just tried your new kernel for F11 ... it's not good for my eeepc 701: it's slower to boot (I have an acpi conflict) and p4_clockmod is missing
Can you please paste the exact acpi conflict you get? I'll add p4_clockmod and (hopefully) fix the conflict in the next kernel release.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 26th June 2009, 01:36 PM
hotdog Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 36
Posts: 250
Hi Quasar, good work as always. A couple of comments:

1. The eee-control rpm is slightly incomplete. Installing the rpm following your instructions gets the notification area applet running from the next boot, but it doesn't setup the system to automatically start the corresponding daemon. As it stands you have to manually execute the /etc/init.d/eee-control-daemon as root each time you boot the machine to make the eee-control notification area applet work. It's been a while since I've fiddled with the init setup files but I think what is required is a suitable symbolic link to /etc/rc5.d/ so that it gets started on entering X. Note that when installing the rpm you get an error message pointing out that eee-control doesn't support chkconfig, so the less elegant /etc/rc5.d/ symbolic link solution is probably necessary.

2. At this moment in time both your custom kernel and the standard F11 kernel have the same versions (2.6.29.5-191) and so the installation instructions on your website won't work. `rpm -ivh blah...' won't install your custom kernel as it isn't from rpm's point of view a newer version, 'rpm -ivh --force blah..' is required to get it to install.

I do have a couple of questions for fellow Eee PC and Fedora users:

1. Does suspend and hibernate work reliably for you? As far as I'm concerned these function are a must have for a usable laptop, but all my attempts with F11 so far have resulted in a hang on resume from suspend.

2. How are you finding the video performance? I've noticed a reduction in frame rate going from F10 to F11 playing oolite, and with both F10 and F11 I've had appalling bad performance (utterly unusable) with rdesktop when running remote Windows applications which use vector graphics (e.g. ZEMAX). Note in the second case that a 4 year old laptop with i915 graphics running Centos 4 out performs my Eee by at least an order of magnitude in redraw speed.
__________________
Asus Eee PC 901, 2GB RAM, 20GB SSD + 16GB SDHC w/ Fedora 11
HTC Hero w/ Android 1.5 (MoDaCo Custom ROM 2.2e)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 26th June 2009, 02:59 PM
macs Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasar8000 View Post
You mean slower than the stock kernel or slower than F10 used to be?
Slower to boot then F11 stock kernel.

by the way, thanks for the great work!!!
__________________
[]'s macs
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 26th June 2009, 11:58 PM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
1. The eee-control rpm is slightly incomplete. Installing the rpm following your instructions gets the notification area applet running from the next boot, but it doesn't setup the system to automatically start the corresponding daemon. As it stands you have to manually execute the /etc/init.d/eee-control-daemon as root each time you boot the machine to make the eee-control notification area applet work. It's been a while since I've fiddled with the init setup files but I think what is required is a suitable symbolic link to /etc/rc5.d/ so that it gets started on entering X. Note that when installing the rpm you get an error message pointing out that eee-control doesn't support chkconfig, so the less elegant /etc/rc5.d/ symbolic link solution is probably necessary.
Actually, there's a more elegant solution that's been pointed out before here and here. I just finished patching, compiling, and testing a revised version of eee-control 0.9.3 in which I included that solution. It installs cleanly without any errors and the daemon starts automatically on startup You can find the mirrors and SHA1 sum here.

Quote:
2. At this moment in time both your custom kernel and the standard F11 kernel have the same versions (2.6.29.5-191) and so the installation instructions on your website won't work. `rpm -ivh blah...' won't install your custom kernel as it isn't from rpm's point of view a newer version, 'rpm -ivh --force blah..' is required to get it to install.
That's correct. I think the new stock kernel update was released today. This will be fixed by the next release though.

Quote:
1. Does suspend and hibernate work reliably for you? As far as I'm concerned these function are a must have for a usable laptop, but all my attempts with F11 so far have resulted in a hang on resume from suspend.
I tested the suspend (over a 15 min period) and it worked without problems. I'm interested in knowing if other people faced any issues with that and if those issues are time-related.

Quote:
2. How are you finding the video performance? I've noticed a reduction in frame rate going from F10 to F11 playing oolite, and with both F10 and F11 I've had appalling bad performance (utterly unusable) with rdesktop when running remote Windows applications which use vector graphics (e.g. ZEMAX). Note in the second case that a 4 year old laptop with i915 graphics running Centos 4 out performs my Eee by at least an order of magnitude in redraw speed.
Not sure about what could be impacting the video performance that much (I didn't test it on my Eee PC 901) but I received a kernel patch from Jon Nettleton today that's supposed to enhance graphics performance on some Eee PCs. I'll include it in my next kernel release, but I'm interested in knowing whether everyone else is facing these problems or not.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 27th June 2009, 12:09 AM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
Slower to boot then F11 stock kernel
I just removed my disk encryption and tested boot times of the stock and Eee PC kernels using bootchart. They were 28 seconds and 20 seconds respectively. So there's an 8 second improvement in the boot time of the Eee PC kernel, which I'm trying to improve even more. However, if you feel the Eee PC kernel is slower than the stock in booting, you can check the boot time using the same method (if you're not using disk encryption): yum install bootchart, reboot, then run bootchart in the terminal. This should create a png image of the data in your home directory.

Please let me know the results if you do this test.

Quote:
by the way, thanks for the great work!!!
You're most welcome
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 27th June 2009, 07:11 PM
fredex Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 71
Quote:
2. How are you finding the video performance? I've noticed a reduction in frame rate going from F10 to F11 playing oolite, and with both F10 and F11 I've had appalling bad performance (utterly unusable) with rdesktop when running remote Windows applications which use vector graphics (e.g. ZEMAX). Note in the second case that a 4 year old laptop with i915 graphics running Centos 4 out performs my Eee by at least an order of magnitude in redraw speed
I've not done much testing of graphics, but I did note that glxgears is VASTLY slower on the stock F11 kernel than it is on my F10 installation (using Quasar8000's latest kernel).

Using Quasar's [edit]last F10[end edit] kernel the default-size window produces about 700 FPS, but the same size window on F11 gets only 100-150 FPS.

[edit]BTW this is a linux-based 901.[end edit]

I'm currently running F11-LIVE from a USB stick because I haven't yet steeled myself up for backing up the f10 (use dd to pull an image of the two SSDs and store it on my NAS device in case I ever want to put it back) and doing a full install. one of these days.

But in the meantime, in addition to the slow video performance, there's the fact that it won't drive my laser printer (there are already several Bugzillas on this) which may not be a show-stopper, but it's not far from being one. that printer has worked flawlessly on several other linuxes including Centos 4, Centos 5, F10, the stock Xandros-derivative that came on the 901, and Ubuntu 9.04 live.

Last edited by fredex; 27th June 2009 at 07:12 PM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 28th June 2009, 10:56 AM
Dohmar Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasar8000 View Post
I just removed my disk encryption and tested boot times of the stock and Eee PC kernels using bootchart. They were 28 seconds and 20 seconds respectively. So there's an 8 second improvement in the boot time of the Eee PC kernel, which I'm trying to improve even more. However, if you feel the Eee PC kernel is slower than the stock in booting, you can check the boot time using the same method (if you're not using disk encryption): yum install bootchart, reboot, then run bootchart in the terminal. This should create a png image of the data in your home directory.

You're most welcome
Hi Quasar, just wanna add I do like the eee kernel and think that its worthy of running on my own however I'm curious in regards to file sizes - it looks like the custom kernel is ~280k bigger than the stock fedora kernels, I always assumed a custom kernel would be smaller. I certainly have no qualms about boot speed (and I need to use the eee kernel to get the eee-control utility working properly) however I'm also wondering as to why the eee custom kernel shows text before plymouth loads up? When I run stock kernel, plymouth is the first thing seen - can we possibly get a silent eee kernel compiled so we can impress the anally retentive?

Thanks again!
-D
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 30th June 2009, 02:22 PM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
however I'm curious in regards to file sizes - it looks like the custom kernel is ~280k bigger than the stock fedora kernels, I always assumed a custom kernel would be smaller.
I just double checked the sizes and the Eee PC kernel is almost one third the size of the stock kernel. Are you sure you're comparing the right packages?

Quote:
however I'm also wondering as to why the eee custom kernel shows text before plymouth loads up?
This might have to do with the order in which the kernel starts up, but I'll look more into it and try to figure out how to fix it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 30th June 2009, 05:03 PM
Dohmar Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4
Hi Quasar,
Not sure if I'm reading it right, but this is the dump from /boot

[root@eee boot]# ls -la
total 31715
drwxr-xr-x. 5 root root 1024 2009-06-25 19:27 .
drwxr-xr-x. 22 root root 4096 2009-07-01 10:55 ..
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 97567 2009-05-28 06:55 config-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 68239 2009-06-23 07:14 config-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 97616 2009-06-17 13:02 config-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 97848 2009-06-17 12:57 config-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 1024 2009-06-05 02:37 efi
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 118396 2009-04-25 04:49 elf-memtest86+-2.11
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 1024 2009-06-25 19:27 grub
-rw-------. 1 root root 3520305 2009-06-13 03:15 initrd-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3500693 2009-06-25 17:05 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3519875 2009-06-25 19:26 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3520600 2009-06-25 19:27 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE.img
drwx------. 2 root root 12288 2009-06-11 16:23 lost+found
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 116720 2009-04-25 04:49 memtest86+-2.11
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1257178 2009-05-28 06:55 System.map-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1392193 2009-06-23 07:14 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1257149 2009-06-17 13:02 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1274538 2009-06-17 12:57 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 3035056 2009-05-28 06:55 vmlinuz-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3295728 2009-06-23 07:14 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3033520 2009-06-17 13:02 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3088208 2009-06-17 12:57 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
[root@eee boot]#

seems to be 3295728 vs 3088208 for the equivalent stock kernel - is vmlinuz not the name of the kernel image?

Thanks for checking the text issue out.

-D
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 5th July 2009, 07:09 PM
glb Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 29
Hi,

I just tried installing Fedora 11 onto a SD card in my EEE PC 900. Fedora 11 boots off of its default kernel, but hangs with your kernel. I think that it is hanging while trying to mount the file system. If I give your kernel the parameter root=/dev/sda1 (the 16 GB internal SSD), it will boot (into single user mode anyway). Is there any chance that my configuration could be made to work?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 6th July 2009, 06:17 AM
Quasar8000 Offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 111
Quote:
Hi Quasar,
Not sure if I'm reading it right, but this is the dump from /boot

[root@eee boot]# ls -la
total 31715
drwxr-xr-x. 5 root root 1024 2009-06-25 19:27 .
drwxr-xr-x. 22 root root 4096 2009-07-01 10:55 ..
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 97567 2009-05-28 06:55 config-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 68239 2009-06-23 07:14 config-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 97616 2009-06-17 13:02 config-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 97848 2009-06-17 12:57 config-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
drwxr-xr-x. 3 root root 1024 2009-06-05 02:37 efi
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 118396 2009-04-25 04:49 elf-memtest86+-2.11
drwxr-xr-x. 2 root root 1024 2009-06-25 19:27 grub
-rw-------. 1 root root 3520305 2009-06-13 03:15 initrd-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3500693 2009-06-25 17:05 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3519875 2009-06-25 19:26 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586.img
-rw------- 1 root root 3520600 2009-06-25 19:27 initrd-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE.img
drwx------. 2 root root 12288 2009-06-11 16:23 lost+found
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 116720 2009-04-25 04:49 memtest86+-2.11
-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 1257178 2009-05-28 06:55 System.map-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1392193 2009-06-23 07:14 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1257149 2009-06-17 13:02 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1274538 2009-06-17 12:57 System.map-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
-rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 3035056 2009-05-28 06:55 vmlinuz-2.6.29.4-167.fc11.i586
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3295728 2009-06-23 07:14 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.eeepc.fc11.i686.PAE
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3033520 2009-06-17 13:02 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i586
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3088208 2009-06-17 12:57 vmlinuz-2.6.29.5-191.fc11.i686.PAE
[root@eee boot]#

seems to be 3295728 vs 3088208 for the equivalent stock kernel - is vmlinuz not the name of the kernel image?
I never checked the kernel size this way, I always simply use the size of the package, but I'll look into this too and see if I can find an explanation.

Quote:
I just tried installing Fedora 11 onto a SD card in my EEE PC 900. Fedora 11 boots off of its default kernel, but hangs with your kernel. I think that it is hanging while trying to mount the file system. If I give your kernel the parameter root=/dev/sda1 (the 16 GB internal SSD), it will boot (into single user mode anyway). Is there any chance that my configuration could be made to work?
Do you get any errors when the kernel hangs when you're trying to boot from the SDHC?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
eee, fedora

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fedora 10 on the Eee PC 901/1000 Quasar8000 Guides & Solutions (No Questions) 271 24th June 2009 12:32 PM
EeePC 1000 Fedora 9 masta Hardware & Laptops 82 2nd December 2008 08:43 AM
Fedora 10 Eee PC 901/1000 Custom Kernel Quasar8000 Alpha, Beta & Snapshots Discussions (Fedora 10 Only) 2 22nd November 2008 12:16 PM
Fedora 8 64 bit on hp tx 1000 dipankar Using Fedora 2 20th November 2007 09:45 AM
Fedora on Digital Alphaserver 1000 4/266 BinairyGuy Installation, Upgrades and Live Media 2 29th June 2005 03:05 PM


Current GMT-time: 23:38 (Wednesday, 17-09-2014)

TopSubscribe to XML RSS for all Threads in all ForumsFedoraForumDotOrg Archive
logo

All trademarks, and forum posts in this site are property of their respective owner(s).
FedoraForum.org is privately owned and is not directly sponsored by the Fedora Project or Red Hat, Inc.

Privacy Policy | Term of Use | Posting Guidelines | Archive | Contact Us | Founding Members

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

FedoraForum is Powered by RedHat