Laptops :: Asus Eee PC Laptop



Quote
The desktop stats say Linux 2.6.24.4 on i686

Stats = torsmo? If it says 2.6.x you're not running DSL unless you remastered with a 2.6 kernel. And DSL shouldn't take up 82MB RAM like a 2.6-based distro would (edit: at least with a default one size fits all kernel).

Quote
filesytem shows UNIONFS/lib/modules/2.4.26

That isn't the kernel you're running. I'd love to see the error messages in your console from mismatched kernel and modules.

Open a terminal and type
Code Sample
uname -a


That will tell you what you're running -- most likely the same thing torsmo is reporting.

edit...
Quote
I only had to build the atl2.ko module for the 2.6.24.4 kernel, the rest is configuration.

Ummm, DSL doesn't use kernel 2.6.24.4. That module wouldn't be of much use if you were using DSL. What other 'configuration' have you done with this? (Or are you running DSL virtually?)
Certainly interested oldtimer! I am looking to buy an eee 900 when released, so please explain.

How much time does it take to boot up?
Thanks, lucky13.

Quote
Stats = torsmo?

Yes.

Quote
If it says 2.6.x you're not running DSL unless you remastered with a 2.6 kernel.

Not true.

Quote
And DSL shouldn't take up 82MB RAM like a 2.6-based distro would (edit: at least with a default one size fits all kernel).

Clean boot to JWM is < 30M.  I was running  Fluxbox, Tomcat Webserver, etc.

Quote
That isn't the kernel you're running.

Correct.  2.6.24.4

Quote
I'd love to see the error messages in your console from mismatched kernel and modules.

Fantastic.

Quote
That will tell you what you're running -- most likely the same thing torsmo is reporting.

Wrong.  Different.

Quote
Ummm, DSL doesn't use kernel 2.6.24.4.

OK, call it DSL-N-0.1RC5, if you wish.  I won't quibble, but it is using the stock DSL KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX.  So I call it DSL.

BTW, I need to use a 3.X version because the large icons are perfect on the hardware.  Can you recommend which one?  By the way, myDSL stopped working when I tried 3.4.11.  I am hoping it has nothing at all to do with errors caused by the newer kernel...
....So you just replaced the kernel without touching the image? Brave...
Quote
OK, call it DSL-N-0.1RC5, if you wish

No, I don't think you're responsible for putting together release candidates for DSL or DSL-N -- that's for Robert and John to do. So I'll call it something else. Sounds like you've done a sloppy job of whatever you've done if it's using 2.4 unionfs while running a 2.6 kernel. Hint: that really shouldn't happen.
Quote
I won't quibble, but it is using the stock DSL KNOPPIX/KNOPPIX.
So I call it DSL.

You can call it a duck but if it doesn't have webbed feet and feathers and won't quack or waddle I'd have call it something else. I won't speak for John or Robert, but I won't call that DSL. I'll call it what it is, whatever your intentions were: a really amateur hack. There are several users here who've done 2.6-based remasters. You should ask them for guidance.:)

Edit: Yeah, it probably does have something to do with your kernel. Especially if you're trying to use unionfs (UNC) and if you left out cloops (UCI).

Also, the RAM stats shown in torsmo aren't complete -- they don't count cache. Do "free -mt" and see what you're really using.
Next Page...
original here.