Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

you realy don't get the point:

u-boot does /not/ require flashing
not having uboot requires flashing


kerrnel problems are nasty if you can't revert to a fallback kernel, arn't they? bad if you have to flash everytime. uboot has everything that can make that a thing of the past.

uboot provides a solution to the problem you see and is not the problem...

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

first , I repeat.... you don't have to use u-boot , stay away from kernel packages in extras-devel .

the thread title is :
N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???

it reflects your opinion that you don't need u-boot ...

assuming you knew what you were doing , you went on and installed kernel-package from extras-devel , knowing that u-boot will be installed as you have read the change log , the title won't be "why with uboot" .

others having problems with u-boot installed the kernel-package from extras-devel without knowing the changes , well it's their fault , they have been warned before about installing software from extras-devel .
and it's not like fixing that is too hard , if you are caught in a reboot loop / kernel doesn't start , just extract the pr1.3 kernel and flash it , then install stable power-kernel version , or extract the power kernel image from .deb of stable version , and flash it , that works too .

or follow instructions by Matan
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php...270#post870270

if the phone starts , but you just don't like u-boot , installing stable kernel-version will overwrite u-boot .

as posted above , u-boot is there to help you load different kernels from any where without needing to flash them .

multiboot currently wears your oneNAND by flashing new kernel every time you choose a different OS , in the future , multiboot can be used to write boot.scr for u-boot , instead of flashing .

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

you don' t use things from devel for a productive phone... and btw shouldn't use apt from the command line and alsonot the fast application manager.

yes. but /if/ case of productive use: there my alies are with the users. if you want it for productive the users need a menu and not that boot.scr. not having it is a imo usability bug.
you will want a fallback kernel as well so that if luser installs a kernel that doesn't work at once can boot with some other working kernel he had before and that again requires a menu.
a simple thing like numbers in front of the choices and loading dependend on the number typed in could resolve this.

there are more than this bug to resolve. i am the last to say that is fit for productive and be the first to criticize it if it was labled "for productive use"...

but you are right: some take something with a huge label "BROKEN" and "not fit for productive use" and than they say: hey look, how come that we have problems with broken stuff?
sid breaks the toys: we know that. but that doesn't make the toys bad.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Btw, since with uboot you don't need to flash new kernels and can have concurrent kernels installed, why is it that the power kernel is installed as the only one instead of having the stock kernel present as an option?

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

afaik, the stock kernel remains since titan's kernel has a mechanism that will revert to the default kernel in the case of an unexpected reboot.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

i thought it just loaded the default settings instead of custom ones, the settings you get on a fresh install without any previous power kernel install having been done in the device before.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

way too much kernel-power thread!

yes im a troll, but we have the overclocking thread. where we can talk all about the kernel

we also have the "report your issues" post to talk about what is the problem in v45 so we can help developers making the kernel stable.

just saying :)

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

I disagree. I'm interesting in the kernel-power kernel, but I'm not interested in overclocking.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

You can do it yourself, it is rather simple to remove u-boot from kernel image.

For example, after some studies, I have removed actual u-boot from kernel image v45 and replaced it with older version (same as v44).
So now I have a Power Kernel v45 with u-boot from Power Kernel v44

u-boot (Matan's version) included in v44 power kernel is more usefull on N900 than version presents in v43/v45 power kernel (which is the same presents in uboot-PR13 package) but unfortunately it works only on HW revision 2101 and it hangs on HW revision 2204

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

since .45 and uboot i can't reboot my device...
it ends in a reboot loop.
same thing is when the charger is attached.


another problem is, that the sound stops.
pulseaudio seems to be unloaded by the kernel.

when i do a reinstall of
kernel-power
kernel-power-flasher
kernel-power-settings

all works.

but after some new boots, the same problem arrives
-.-'


is there anybody with the same problem/problems


Greetz
Erazor

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

When you say reboots, do you mean running the reboot command, or selecting reboot from the power key menu? Or do you mean powering off and then using the power key to power on? If it is the former, please try to power off and then power on, instead of reboot, and see if it helps.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

About the subject of the thread - power kernel comes with u-boot since its maintainer, titan, chose so. Since it is free software you have a few options if you are unhappy with his choice, even without giving up the benefits of the power kernel:

1. You can create you own power 45 kernel image without u-boot, as Fabry did.
2. You can change the source package to generate a u-boot-less image, and distribute the package (with name changed) for users who feel like you.
3. You can change the source package to generate two images, one with and one without u-boot (it is easy) and offer this change to titan so that two kernel image packages will be created, and users will have a choice of which package to install. I don't know if titan will accept such a patch, but it has a better chance than merely asking for not including u-boot.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

I don't see anything wrong with the concept of saying this feature sucks and asking the developer to get rid of it. There are many very responsive developers here who respond to the requests of the users.

I think that uboot is pretty dramatic and that there is a reasonable argument for making it separate from this wildly popular alternate kernel.

Personally, I love uboot so far and welcome it as part of the kernel.

But I don't see anything wrong about users who disagree making their case.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

I think that u-boot is a great thing. I tested yesterday MeeGo. Because implemented u-boot in titan's kernel, it was very simple task, I just copied MeeGo's image on memory card. I hope that we will see soon similar image file for Nitdroid.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

see, i do not have an issue with people finding bugs. i do not have an issue with people who expect the stable packages to work.

i do have an issue with folks that miss the devel point. who use broken stuff and demand it to be not broken. this is not only with meamo the case: you have something labled: stable/working and instead of that they take the things labled unstable/devel/experimental and then complain it realy is unstable.

i have an issue with that, because this behavior leads to a situation in which the devs have to do their experiments and theit developement behind closed doors and only make finished, fully functional, tested stuff public. i have an issue with that for i do like to see the work of others even though it is not finished because that might help me to solve a similar problem or save me the trouble of doing the same work already done by others again. and i want to see the work in the open for there might be someone out there with a brilliant idea to a problem.
i also have an issue with that because you need a bootloader for all kind of projects. it's good if all the projects try to get it in so that they will work smoothly together and not break each others stuff. and again if that happens behind closed doors you can not try to make things work smoothly together for you don't know what the others do or already have done. so i realy like to have the devel stuff in the open. and ask those who use that stuff to respect that it is such: under construction.

if devel stops being devel - that is being inherently broken - you can close it down alltogether and only have a stable branch. that is what i have a real issue with. and i also have an issue with measuring devel stuff,things under construction, based on the number of bugs and unactivated features instead of the potential they have and what it will be. the possibility to resolve issues.

you just don't go to a construction site and and demand to stop the construction for there are no carpets on the floor and no glass in the windows - and on top reason that with: "look, others also found that this house has no carpets it realy has no carpets".
well... never mind ..

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

hey matan thx for your reply :)

i mean the reboot from zhe powerkey menu and the command line reboot
same prob everywhere.
don't know why that is so.

but thats the little problem and i can life with that :D


i minor problem is, that the sound stops working after some boots and i have to power up my n900 4-5 times to have sound running again.

OR

i flash the kernel again and on next boot, the sound works too.


is there a solution Matan?


BTW

i bring all respect to the Power-Kernel and other works here...
I will NEVER say:

Hey that sucks or anything else.

THX to all Builders out there for all the HARD and FREE work for us :)


Best regards
Erazor

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

I ask more verbose:

If you first make sure nothing (charger, computer, etc.) is connected to the usb port of the N900. Then power off by selecting power off from the power key menu. Make sure the device does really turn off and does not reboot immediately (as might happen if you used host mode). Then you turn it on in the usual way by pressing the power key.

Does it happen that the audio does not work after such a sequence?

If if does please run the command

dmesg > out.file

and upload the out.file somewhere I can see it.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

hey there :)

i dont have a charger or anything else on the device.
now i shut down the n900 wait a min. and boot it.
no sound.

Download out.file here

thx for all

Greetz
Erazor


//edit
re-installed pulseaudio

sound is off : /

//edit2


re-flashed the Kernel

now pidof shows that pulseaudio exist

i try to type pulseaudio to the /etc/modules

perhabs this work.

i let you know what happens :)

//edit3

write pulseaudio into /etc/modules
now my sound works well :)
hope this works in future, too :D

don't know why pulseaudio start at boot.

but when it works with /etc/modules it's fine for me :)

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Hi Matan,

I have had same kind of audio and also video problems as Erazor. After some boot times (now it took 5) audio & video stop working. Rebooting (power key & battery removal) do not help. When problems occurs, then boot-up video is not showed, no audio, no video playback possible.

Here is dmesg files from OK and Not OK boot-ups.
dmesg.zip

This v45 test was my 4th trial and only thing which has helped is reinstall of kernel-power. v42 is OK

I hope this will help you.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Did you test my solution with /etc/modules ?

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

I'll try that. Are you able to play videos when pulseaudio is not loaded "correctly"?

There must be something wrong with the startup if it works OK during quite many boots and then suddenly stops totally.
Also I tried to compare OK boot log to Not OK boot log. There are quite lot of differences. I hope Matan can say something about that.

[EDIT]: pulseaudio in /etc/modules did'nt help. Right from 1st boot after v45 update no audio.

If I try to play any audio- or videofile error message is "Media cannot be played. Format is not supported"

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

really? where?
i took a look at your logs, and other than differences in the sequence of some entries, they appear to be the same.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

You are right, I should have said differences in sequence. Should there be differences between bootups? Is that normal? I really don't know. V45 just won't work with my HW...

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

no

nothing works 4me
it always says:

unsupported media .......


i think uboot is the devil :D

can it be, that uboot starts to fast?
and when its to fast it drops some modules!?

is it possible to make 2 release of kernel-power?

one with uboot one with stock nolo bootloader

that would be best :)

but then i will miss the tux on startup and the post output like on the pc :(

^^ hm we can't have everything :D



//edit

same problem arrived...
dammit

no sound

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Yes, v42 (without uboot) and v45 (with uboot). Or as Matan said above, you can make your kernel image without uboot.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

yes, it's normal that not every boot is the same :)
sometimes a device is faster or slower than usual, for whatever reason. nothing to worry about, and probably not the reason for your problems with pulseaudio... the audio device (alsa) gets initialized fine in both logs.

what does as root say? if it's listed but not running, you could try debugging the event.d script. the command starts the daemon, maybe its output will give you a clue to the error.
if "initctl list pulseaudio" comes back empty ("no jobs matching"), your event.d scripts are messed up...

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

yes i read this.

can you make a step by step tutorial to uninstall uboot and install
nolo again?

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Fix for problems in No sound throughout the OS tread

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

BIG THX

that worked :)

damn nice :D


thx to all :)

Greetz
Erazor

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

good to know that it works now, although i'd rather try to determine why the FLAC symlink is incorrect or doesn't work instead of just copying the file... i still have that symlink and never had a problem...
anyhow, just remember that your rootfs just grew by 300 kB ;)

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

whats 300kb instead of no music :D

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Nolo is always present, noone remove it.

The sequence is :

- nolo starts u-boot thinking it is a kernel
- u-boot starts real kernel

To remove u-boot you must only flash a kernel image without u-boot enclosed

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

im fine with uboot :)
i only thought the problem was uboot ;)

but it seems thats a PR1.3 Bug ;)

so nothing to blame on kernel-power


Greetz
Erazor

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Step by step guide: http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=65776

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

thx 4 that :)

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

Kernel 46 uboot is either gone or improved.

I saw no sign of it with the keyboard closed on boot, but with it open I could back up. Anyway, to me it seems better, faster, and nicer.

Note: for some reason Faster Application Manager didn't show me the kernel update option, but the original Application Manager did.

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

power kernel v46 uboot disabled

according to changelogs at https://garage.maemo.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=6570

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

There's a bunch of threads on the kernels that are too long to read all the way through, so at the risk of going slightly OT, i'm on v42 and i have only used the kernels for OCing. Am i missing other features that i should be looking into?

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

normal. for that reason i say: don't use fam and don't use apt-get from the shell. hildon/ham is the troublemaker but that does not matter it results in that only ham works sane ....
i did mention it - didn't i?

Re: N900 kernel v45, why with uboot???
 

i updated from fapman, showed v46 after updating catalogs and then press upgrade

@richwhite : if you use power kernel 'only' for overclocking purpose, you should stick with version 42, prominent new feature in the next versions is related with usb hostmode support & uboot integration (except for v46)