Tiny Core Linux

Tiny Core Base => TCB News => Release Candidate Testing => Topic started by: Juanito on March 15, 2017, 03:18:27 AM

Title: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 15, 2017, 03:18:27 AM

Team Tiny Core is pleased to announce that Tiny Core 8.0 Beta1 is available for public testing:

http://repo.tinycorelinux.net/8.x/x86/release_candidates/
http://repo.tinycorelinux.net/8.x/x86_64/release_candidates/

This is an beta level cut. If you decide to help test, then please test carefully. We don't want anyone to lose data.

Most extensions have been copied over from the 7.x repo - note that the Xorg-7.7 extensions have been updated and the ncurses and readline extensions have changed major versions.

We appreciate testing and feedback.

If you use distribution files note that you need a new vmlinuz and core.gz (or rootfs.gz + modules.gz)

Changelog for 8.0 beta1:
* busybox updated to 1.25.1 and cpio patched for uid/gid error
* kernel updated to 4.8.17
* glibc updated to 2.24
* gcc updated to 6.2.0
* e2fsprogs base libs/apps updated to 1.43.3
* util-linux base libs/apps updated to 2.28.2

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: gerald_clark on March 15, 2017, 11:47:29 AM

Something is weird with tce-update.
When updating libasound.tcz, every package in the repo is downloaded as a dependency.
There is no libasound.tcz.dep file in the repo.

------- Update ---------
I deleted the alsa, alsa-config, and libasound files from optional, and re-installed the 3 extensions.
There were no unusual deps loaded on installation.

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 16, 2017, 07:48:14 AM

This change has been made to tce-update since 7.2:

https://github.com/tinycorelinux/Core-scripts/commit/992646e194a0effd1f81a8b5a76b463438951f3e

..but I don't see that causing the error you describe?

The other possibility is that libasound was updated about the same time as you reported the error - maybe it was something to do with that.

So far, I didn't manage to reproduce.

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Misalf on March 22, 2017, 03:28:45 AM

So far things work, except that Xorg uses the Gallium driver for the Intel 945GME (i915) which needed to be forced via xorg.conf.d before.
Is that expected to happen? Can I still use the old Intel driver somehow?
The Gallium driver provides only poor performance for me.

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 23, 2017, 01:56:57 AM

Are you speaking of the modesetting driver loaded by Xorg or xf86-video-intel?

I guess that if gallium could be forced by settings in xorg.conf.d previously, it could be unforced by similar means?

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 24, 2017, 06:15:12 AM

Doing some more checking, modesetting:

Code: [Select]

[   162.709] (II) Loading sub module "glamoregl"
[   162.709] (II) LoadModule: "glamoregl"
[   162.709] (II) Loading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/libglamoregl.so
[   162.728] (II) Module glamoregl: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[   162.728] compiled for 1.19.1, module version = 1.0.0
[   162.728] ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4
[   162.728] (II) glamor: OpenGL accelerated X.org driver based.
[   162.728] couldn't get display device
[   162.728] (EE) modeset(0): glamor initialization failed
modesetting + Xorg-7.7-3d:

Code: [Select]

[    43.604] (II) Loading sub module "glamoregl"
[    43.604] (II) LoadModule: "glamoregl"
[    43.604] (II) Loading /usr/local/lib/xorg/modules/libglamoregl.so
[    43.622] (II) Module glamoregl: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
[    43.622] compiled for 1.19.1, module version = 1.0.0
[    43.622] ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4
[    43.622] (II) glamor: OpenGL accelerated X.org driver based.
[    43.693] (II) glamor: EGL version 1.4 (DRI2):
[    43.710] (II) modeset(0): glamor initialized

glxgears -> 300 frames in 5.0 seconds = 59.998 FPS
There is no mention of glamor in the Xorg log for xf86-video-intel with or without Xorg-7.7-3d

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 27, 2017, 02:20:20 AM

CorePlus-8.0beta1.iso added

Thanks to @coreplayer2 for updating the firmware* extensions

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: PDP-8 on March 28, 2017, 05:47:23 AM

Re: CorePlus 8.0beta1

Looks like the three options that actually need "wireless 4.8.17" are not getting installed.

1) Boot Core with X/Gui (Tinycore) + installation extension:
I did a frugal hard drive install, and even though I selected the addition of wireless, the wireless extension did not get installed.

2) Boot Core + Wifi Extension :  no wifi extension installed

3) Boot Core + Wifi + Firmware:  no wifi extension installed.  (i did not check for firmware too)

Made my Netgear WG111 v2/v3 dongles cry. :)  Back to 7.2 on my spare testing laptop.  I looked around for wifi.sh to do it via cli, but no luck there either.

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: polikuo on March 28, 2017, 11:53:07 AM

Quote from: PDP-8 on March 28, 2017, 05:47:23 AM

Looks like the three options that actually need "wireless 4.8.17" are not getting installed.

It seems that the kernel modules in the iso are the old ones.
Both "ndiswrapper-modules-KERNEL" and "wireless-KERNEL" are 4.2.9 when it should be 4.8.17

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: polikuo on March 28, 2017, 12:27:58 PM

Why not recompile ezremaster against fltk-1.3 ?
That way, we can omit the old fltk-1.1.10 from the iso.
I can't find the latest source code though ...
The one I could find is not compilable and a bit too old consider the changes over the years ...
http://tinycorelinux.net/3.x/tcz/source/ezremaster/ (http://tinycorelinux.net/3.x/tcz/source/ezremaster/)

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on March 29, 2017, 12:33:22 AM

I should be able to fix this in a few days time

Title: Re: Core v8.0beta1
Post by: Juanito on April 05, 2017, 03:53:17 AM

CorePlus iso replaced - it should be OK now