ext Walter Bender wrote:
but unfortunately have not got feedback, and I suspect one of the reasons is
that it is too difficult to boot UBIFS on XO.
I think you would be well served by making it clearer to people what
the goals are of UBIFS relative to existing systems, such as JFFS2, on
the
David Woodhouse wrote:
http://git.infradead.org/?p=openfirmware.git;a=commitdiff;h=a0b5a7b0c
OpenFirmware boots from the partition named 'boot' in the RedBoot
partition table. The rest are yours to play with as you see fit.
Thanks David, I'll take a look at this.
--
Best Regards,
Artem
1432 won't boot X on my B4.
Lots of kernel modules not found at boot time.
On 16 dec 2007, at 04:15, Build Announcer Script wrote:
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build1432/
-cpio.i386 0:2.6-28.fc7
-dmraid.i386 0:1.0.0.rc14-4.fc7
-findutils.i386 1:4.2.29-2
I get lots of:
modprobe: FATAL Could not load /bib/modules/2.6.22-2007...5831/
modules.dep: No such file or directory
After a forced shutdown, it seems to have caused jffs2 corruption as
boot stops at Starting HAL daemon with
JFFS2 notice (1340): wrong data CRC in data node at
On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 15:01 +0100, Pascal Scheffers wrote:
I get lots of:
modprobe: FATAL Could not load /bib/modules/2.6.22-2007...5831/
modules.dep: No such file or directory
After a forced shutdown, it seems to have caused jffs2 corruption as
boot stops at Starting HAL daemon with
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Project name : LiveBackup_XO-LiveCD
2. Existing website, if any :
3. One-line description : Live-CD build based on the LiveBackup Framework
4. Longer description : Live-CD's are created from official OLPC
builds.
Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
but unfortunately have not got feedback, and I suspect one of the reasons is
that it is too difficult to boot UBIFS on XO.
It would be great to have a demo OS image using UBIFS. I can't
help for the partitioning thing, but if you need help with the
process of
Bernardo Innocenti wrote:
Pascal Scheffers wrote:
1432 won't boot X on my B4.
Lots of kernel modules not found at boot time.
Hmm... I think it's my fault :-(
I asked dilinger to remove the dependency on mkinitrd from
the kernel because our olpcrd thing does not even use it,
and it was
On Dec 16, 2007, at 6:08 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
Vs. goal 2: UBIFS write speed is about 70MiB/second, because of the
write-back
support. IOW, UBIFS is similar to traditional FSes like ext2, which
have
internal buffers and make writes fast. To compare, JFFS2 write
speed on XO is
On Dec 16, 2007, at 11:40 PM, John Watlington wrote:
I'm curious how you measured this, as the underlying hardware only
supports a max. transfer rate of around 20 MiB/s...
As Artem mentioned, UBIFS employs a write-back cache, meaning writes
aren't flushed to the underlying medium
On Dec 17, 2007 4:46 PM, Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This makes a hell of a lot of sense. In a synchronous filesystem like
JFFS2, constant and repeated writes to the same single page will keep
pummeling the underlying flash needlessly
It makes a hello of a lot of sense in the scenario
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/update.1/build658/
-AcousticMeasure-6.xo
+AcousticMeasure-7.xo
-Analyze-4.xo
+Analyze-5.xo
-Chat-28.xo
+Chat-31.xo
-Journal-72.xo
+Journal-79.xo
-Web-76.xo
+Web-79.xo
+compat-libstdc++-33.i386 0:3.2.3-61
-libX11.i386 0:1.1.3-1.git20070822.olpc2
On Dec 15, 2007, at 18:26 , Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
The location of the Update.1 builds has changed:
http://pilgrim.laptop.org/~pilgrim/olpc/streams/update.1/
I'm not sure if it's the final location but it would be to update the
Changelog to point to it.
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:51 AM, Joel Stanley wrote:
JFFS2 has done an excellent job, at least on my xos, of keeping
filesystem integrity after sudden power-offs.
Write-back caching does not adversely affect filesystem *integrity*.
It makes a tradeoff by reducing flash write/erase frequency and
On Dec 17, 2007, at 1:53 AM, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
Your excellent photo builds upon a fine tradition
Please do expand http://wiki.laptop.org/go/LOLPC accordingly. ;)
--
Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org
___
Devel mailing list
On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:44 AM, Joel Stanley wrote:
That would be cool. But I think there would as many, maybe more, cases
of batteries being removed, power cords yanked, and generators turning
off causing shutdowns than low-battery issues.
Batteries getting removed with no AC should not be a
16 matches
Mail list logo