Pdaxii13 On Nand

[Meanie]

the problem you are seeing usually is a sign of an incomplete hdimage. the current hdimage-full is 199MB in size. probably should check the integrity of the hdimage before installing it. usually a zcat hdimage-full.tgz |tar tvf - should list the contents of the archive and there should be no errors towards the end of the listing...or you got an incomplete file

[Drake01]

the problem you are seeing usually is a sign of an incomplete hdimage. the current hdimage-full is 199MB in size. probably should check the integrity of the hdimage before installing it. usually a zcat hdimage-full.tgz |tar tvf - should list the contents of the archive and there should be no errors towards the end of the listing...or you got an incomplete file
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Could you maybe provide something like an MD5 checksum file?  That would be really cool.  

[HoloVector]

the problem you are seeing usually is a sign of an incomplete hdimage. the current hdimage-full is 199MB in size. probably should check the integrity of the hdimage before installing it. usually a zcat hdimage-full.tgz |tar tvf - should list the contents of the archive and there should be no errors towards the end of the listing...or you got an incomplete file
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Thanks Meanie.  My hdimage-full.tgz on my 1GB SD card is 199.3MB according to XFE.  That is the same size that the Finder gave on my PowerBook when I downloaded it last night. Running your suggested commands did not give me any errors.      I'm wgetting the another copy of hdimage to make sure IE doesn't mangle it in any way.  Thanks again for your help and hard work.

Now back to beating the bejeezus out this BlackBerry on my desk that won't take the DST update.  

[ArchiMark]

Thanks ArchiMark, John_J and Antikx.

[Snip]

ArchiMark - Just to clarify.  The first time you flashed to 5.3.3 Full you got the plain ROX desktop and not the full featured one I linked to above so, you reflashed and copied the HSImage and got the full featured ROX desktop?

[Snip]

[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157434\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

I just remember having the same issue as you. Seem to recall that I re-downloaded files and did a fresh install (ROM Re-flash & then Install HD Image..) and then all was good!

HTH,

Mark

[HoloVector]

I just remember having the same issue as you. Seem to recall that I re-downloaded files and did a fresh install (ROM Re-flash & then Install HD Image..) and then all was good!

HTH,

Mark
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157463\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Thanks Mark.  I am trying a HD wipe, and reinstall first.  I don't want to use up one of my flash cycles if I can get away with it.

[HoloVector]

I just remember having the same issue as you. Seem to recall that I re-downloaded files and did a fresh install (ROM Re-flash & then Install HD Image..) and then all was good!

HTH,

Mark
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157463\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Thanks Mark.  I am trying a HD wipe, and reinstall first.  I don't want to use up one of my flash cycles if I can get away with it.
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157467\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Okay, it wasn't my HDImage that was the problem since it did the same thing when with the new HDImage I wgetted.  It looks look it was the initrd.bin was the problem.  When I reflashed with a new one and redid the HDImage; I was back in business with all goodies.   Yay!  

Now to pimp my ride before the next ZUM meeting!  

[Meanie]

the problem you are seeing usually is a sign of an incomplete hdimage. the current hdimage-full is 199MB in size. probably should check the integrity of the hdimage before installing it. usually a zcat hdimage-full.tgz |tar tvf - should list the contents of the archive and there should be no errors towards the end of the listing...or you got an incomplete file
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Could you maybe provide something like an MD5 checksum file?  That would be really cool.  
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

MD5 checksum will be provided with the next update, ie build 5.3.4 which should be soon

[HoloVector]

the problem you are seeing usually is a sign of an incomplete hdimage. the current hdimage-full is 199MB in size. probably should check the integrity of the hdimage before installing it. usually a zcat hdimage-full.tgz |tar tvf - should list the contents of the archive and there should be no errors towards the end of the listing...or you got an incomplete file
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157440\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Could you maybe provide something like an MD5 checksum file?  That would be really cool.  
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157448\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

MD5 checksum will be provided with the next update, ie build 5.3.4 which should be soon
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157484\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Thanks Meanie.  You are a true Zaurus God.  

[adf]

Wow... I just got 5.3.3 all settled and another update around the corner.  Very cool.  Think I'll do the upgrade thing rather than flash this time, though  

[portalgod]

I've just moved to Pdaxii13 Akita on my SL-C1000.  I had Cacko before.   Somehow I expected an interface speed increase going from the Qtopia desktop on Cacko to Pdaxrom desktops.

I notice a signifiant lag in starting applications on Pdaxii13 and have seen a previous posting on this thread with the same verbiage.

Is this becuase I'm using the default matchbox desktop manager with the default window manager?   Maybe if I switch to a lighterweight icewm or so with Rox I may see a visible speed increase?

Thoughts?

[Meanie]

I've just moved to Pdaxii13 Akita on my SL-C1000.  I had Cacko before.   Somehow I expected an interface speed increase going from the Qtopia desktop on Cacko to Pdaxrom desktops.

I notice a signifiant lag in starting applications on Pdaxii13 and have seen a previous posting on this thread with the same verbiage.

Is this becuase I'm using the default matchbox desktop manager with the default window manager?   Maybe if I switch to a lighterweight icewm or so with Rox I may see a visible speed increase?

Thoughts?
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

how did you come to such a conclusion? X is a vey resource hungry sub system even on a full PC and is left uninstalled on many systems because of that. QT/E (qtopia) on the other end was designed to be lightweight and fast for small devices so it is quite amazing that X can run at such a speed on a Zaurus. why do people use X instead of qt/e then? because X is more compatible with the many freely available opensource applications that require GTK and people who use linux on their desktop are already familiar with X and he many window managers that are available to choose from.
fluxbox is much more lightweight, icewm is close, but rox is quite a bit more resource hungry...

pdaXrom application run faster since they use soft float instead of hardfloat, but the limiting factor for speed on the Z is ultimately memory and io.

[adf]

cuiold we violate package name conventions oer something?

decided to try ipkg upgrade--- all the v. x.x.10 were viewed as x.x.1 and not "downgraded"
its kinda silly.

it won't kill me to do it manually, but it seems like something you might want fixed

[portalgod]

Is X in pdaxrom the full blown X compilation, or does it take advantage of some kind of reduced functionality / reduced footprint binary compilation such as a "Tiny X" as described here :  http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS9635690404.html ?

I guess maybe my idea of speed increase (which I got from reading several posts in these forums) is moot given the resources X eats up.  Probably running apps from the command line may be faster.  Perhaps I'll have to do some tests and post my app initialization times.

Thanks anyhow

[Meanie]

Is X in pdaxrom the full blown X compilation, or does it take advantage of some kind of reduced functionality / reduced footprint binary compilation such as a "Tiny X" as described here :  http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS9635690404.html ?

I guess maybe my idea of speed increase (which I got from reading several posts in these forums) is moot given the resources X eats up.  Probably running apps from the command line may be faster.  Perhaps I'll have to do some tests and post my app initialization times.

Thanks anyhow
[div align=\"right\"][a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=157933\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a][/div]

Try running Firefox under Cacko and then under pdaXrom. You will notice the speed difference. Firefox runs significantly faster on pdaXrom...
Running shrink wrapped apps under Cacko is obviously faster than running fully featured full blown apps under pdaXrom... you have to compare apples against apples...
as for the tinyx thing, that's just using a framebuffer which is what pdaXrom is doing too.

[portalgod]

Hrmm, so here's an odd one.   Fresh install of pdaxii13 akita base on my sl-c1000.   Boot into X, everything fine and dandy.  

Installed atd to SD.

Using the card applet monitor to eject the card, it reports "You can now eject the card" or whatever the message is.

However if I dropped to console and umount'ed it, it complains that it is busy.

Well of course it is, atd is still being run from the SD

How does the applet allow me to eject?

Maybe a bug?   Anyone else notice or try this?