0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

crouse · 2007-02-20 22:42:45

Another install of 0.8.0 this time on a Compaq Presario M700 Laptop >> worked fine.
Used: base-0.8-beta1-20070122-i686.iso

Last edited by crouse (2007-02-20 22:43:02)

cr7 · 2007-02-21 17:37:42

It works fine on my laptop.

Grimn · 2007-02-21 18:35:40

Used ftp-0.8-beta1-20070122-i686.iso to install on a HP Pavillion dv6000t laptop and it went pretty smoothly

tpowa · 2007-02-24 09:13:29

Hi folks,
after one month heavy hacking during the evenings/weekends on archboot.
0.8 Beta2 Isos are available for i686 and x86_64:
This time only isolinux is used to avoid non booting cd media.
- switched to kernel 2.6.20.1
- to boot the ISO 96 MB RAM are recommended, it breaks somewhere between 80 - 90 MB RAM.
(calculated like this: kernel image + initrd size + decompressed initrd)
- fixed many other small things i cannot remember

The 0.8 Isos now run like any installed arch system,
here are the highlights:
* pacman is included to allow installation of any other needed package
in install environment.
* complete /etc/rc.d/ and /etc/rc.conf support
* complete arch network support, including ssh,telnet and portmap services
* custom config files support:
any media with /config directory and files will be copied to /etc/
install environment
* loading packages as addons during boot:
any media with /packages directory including pacman packages will be
installed during bootup.
* links and naim included to be able to communicate over the internet.
* complete kexec support
* updated doku to 0.8

grab them from your favorite mirror or here:
ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/other/0.8/

please test those Isos well and try to break them, we are stepping forward to rc candidates soon
please fill bugs to:
http://bugs.archlinux.org

Again to clarify Beta2 doesn't mean Arch 0.8 is in beta2 stage, the install environment is meant with beta2.

Have fun and thanks for testing.

greetings
tpowa

Lontronics · 2007-02-24 15:06:28

Hi TPowa,

In the past I have installed Arch, which was not very succesfull.
At the moment I do not know what I can expect from Arch, but the installation process is much improved as I read from several enthousiastic users.
But, what is in 0.8b2; which packages?
Is it with or without X environment, and when yes, which window-manager is used?

May be a stupid question, and may be I did not look around enough but I hope you can point me into the right direction then.

I am following Arch for more then a year now, and I would give it a try when a little more info is available

Jan

Btw, good work

baze · 2007-02-24 15:19:14

the base iso contains x packages but there is not and most likely will never be a default window manager or desktop for arch. that's completely up to you to choose. it's the arch way.

Last edited by baze (2007-02-24 15:19:36)

Lontronics · 2007-02-24 15:40:11

Thank you baze, I will start reading the manuals and give it a try then.

Jan

.:B:. · 2007-02-24 15:41:39

Lontronics wrote:

Hi TPowa,
In the past I have installed Arch, which was not very succesfull.
At the moment I do not know what I can expect from Arch, but the installation process is much improved as I read from several enthousiastic users.
But, what is in 0.8b2; which packages?
Is it with or without X environment, and when yes, which window-manager is used?
May be a stupid question, and may be I did not look around enough but I hope you can point me into the right direction then.
I am following Arch for more then a year now, and I would give it a try when a little more info is available
Jan
Btw, good work

Hi Lontronics . You don't like Zenwalk anymore?

Anyways... X is on the current iso, but you could as well get the base iso (which, I think, does not contain X, but i'm not sure since i didn't use it myself).

You can just install the base category, then have pacman install everything you need, that way you don't have any redundant clutter .

And yes, the 0.8 installer rocks . Major 'problem' for me was it still used 0.7.2 documentation (beta 1), but it looks like it has been fixed . The documentation on the install CD should be plenty to build a lean system, with a customised boot and stuff - trust me

Last edited by B (2007-02-24 15:43:00)

hugin · 2007-02-24 16:58:13

tpowa wrote:

* custom config files support:
any media with /config directory and files will be copied to /etc/
install environment
* loading packages as addons during boot:
any media with /packages directory including pacman packages will be
installed during bootup.

Am I the only one who finds this interesting? Does this mean I can pop a config/ dir with my vimrc in it on a thumbdrive and boot the, and it will work? Or If I'm an emacs guy, I could do the same with the emacs package and deps, since iirc it is missing from the install CD? I think that is great. Especially since with the amount of text editing involved during install (or it's not _a lot_ but enough that I wanted my vimrc).

/swogs

Lontronics · 2007-02-24 17:30:02

Hi B,

I could expect a question like that

I do like ZW, but I am a very lucky person; I do have more then one system to give it a try.

And then I can make the choice ofcourse

Thanks for replying.

Jan

jeroenv · 2007-02-24 19:45:45

I was going to install Arch on my new WindowsXP system (Intel 6600, nvidia 7600GT, ASRock mobo) anyway so i gave beta2 a try. I'm now typing this in Bon Echo (stupid name btw ) on a default Arch install with added xfce4. So everything worked apparently.
To be more precise, it worked like a bloody charm , X11 with OpenGL, network, USB mouse, the lot. Everything just works (reminds me of the struggle some 10 years ago using Yggdrasil with kernel 0.99.something, messing with ModeLines, rebooting over and over (and over) again because the X server went bezurk over an unsupported S3 videocard). Things sure have improved.

A few small things though, i reserved three partitions for Arch in XP's storage manager and it apparently gave them a FAT16 partition type. The Arch installer never complained about this and went ahead and installed everything. Until grub that is which of course failed to install in type a 6 (i.e. fat16) filesystem. I repeated the whole thing but this time i set the right partition types and everything worked ok.

Also there was something wrong with the system clock during the install. While installing the packages, the screen filled up with error messages about time being in the future. And after reboot i got some messages about fs block with a future timestamp and after that an fsck of / because it hadn't been checked in 49145 (or something like that) days ago.

kozaki · 2007-02-25 10:51:38

Booting 0.8 Beta2 i686 Iso from VirtualBox, I happend not being able to find the virtual disk image (8GB extending or 2GB fixed size).
fdisk finds no HDD, as there is neither /dev/hd* neither /dev/sd* devices.
Is there any cheat code or something for arch setup finds virtual HDD ?

tpowa · 2007-02-25 10:58:36

i don't know virtual box but you need to load the correct module for disk devices then or simply try ide-legacy boot option.

Marcel- · 2007-02-25 13:31:27

He meant VirtualBox, "a general-purpose full virtualizer for x86 hardware" (about screen).

EDIT: corrected stupid spelling mistake.

Last edited by Marcel- (2007-02-25 21:20:11)

kozaki · 2007-02-25 17:37:06

Thanks, installation runs alright as soon as I use ide-legacy, as quoted by tpowa
Correct, and BTW, Redistribution of VirtualBox guest additions granted for Arch Linux!

Mr Green · 2007-02-25 20:05:17

try loading piix ...

Can we have 0.8 on bt because download is soooooo slllloooooooow here. ....

Acid7711 · 2007-02-25 20:52:07

0.8 x86_64 install worked fine. Only problem I still have on my system only with 0.8 and not with 0.7.2 is that if I don't pass legacy ide to the kernel on install boot, it detects my hard drives wrong. Not a big deal, more of an inconvenience, but I'm unsure why 0.7.2 detects them properly. I've got a mix of Sata and Ide

kozaki · 2007-02-26 09:14:35

Mr Green wrote:

try loading piix ...
Can we have 0.8 on bt because download is soooooo slllloooooooow here. ....

It worked with "ide-legacy" boot option

Uploaded torrents for Base i686 & x86_64 on http://linuxtracker.org.
Put schoens & 3nd3r Feb screenshots to illustrate as they look very good IMHO.
You can digg it (for i686, for x86_64) if you want to see more leechers & seeders

BTW does somebody knows why ISO do have "noname names" i.e. without "Archlinux" or "Arch" in their names ?
It sure make it pretty uneasy for those who also download other distros, like here:

See? you got "base..." on top then "ftp..." at the bottom with NN files and other distros ISOs in beetween. Not easy

Last edited by kozaki (2007-02-26 09:26:17)

tpowa · 2007-02-26 20:14:32

@ acid define wrong?
it loads it different probalby because of hwdetect ordering of devices but i wouldn't call it wrong.
it should load the modules always the same way and give you the same device names each time you boot the cd.

Acid7711 · 2007-02-26 20:40:25

tpowa wrote:

@ acid define wrong?
it loads it different probalby because of hwdetect ordering of devices but i wouldn't call it wrong.
it should load the modules always the same way and give you the same device names each time you boot the cd.

My definition of wrong meaning it's mixing my ide and sata partitions on it's "detected disks" My ide has only one partition, but if I don't pass ide-legacy to it, it will show a mix of sata1's partitions on ide disk and not show sata1 drive at all. Same goes for my second sata drove, it doesn't show the partitions properly, but it does show this drive in the selection. Very odd.

It makes it impossible to install without passing ide-legacy to it. That's why I called it wrong, and by my definition, unusable is wrong

Like I said, passing ide-legacy fixes the problem, but I've never had pass that variable to any other distro before, and I've tried a lot of them in my day.

Last edited by Acid7711 (2007-02-26 20:44:09)

tpowa · 2007-02-26 21:44:32

which modules are used on your system for hds?

Mr Green · 2007-02-27 07:11:29

Installed 0.8 Beta 2 under Virtualbox no problems

TSP · 2007-02-27 13:32:02

Installed beta 1 via ftp and works perfect : )

PS: Now i am getting a error every trime i use pacman, after the recent udev update.

ferlon · 2007-02-28 23:29:24

After 46 hours downloading, the Arch 0.8 beta 1 installer says, at the beginning of setup:

"No CD drive found"

The same occurs with all other distros I tried. Even with 2.6.20's (Kurumin, GeexBox, Lunar. And I know beta 1 is 2.6.19.)
Intel / Marvell chipset seems a blackhole without solution! A trap.

Absolutelly Frustrated,
ferlon
(newbie from Brazil)
----------

Intel DG965WH (audio /video onboard) -- Chipset P/G 965 Intel + Marvell
Core2Duo E6400, IDE cd and DVd drives, Seagate SATA II 250GB, 1GB DDR2 dual Kingston

-----------

tpowa · 2007-02-28 23:31:42

ferlon, sorry the beta2 fixed this, its recommended to use the latest iso available.
you ran into the grub boot bug that occurs on some weird hardware constellation

Arch Linux

#251 2007-02-20 22:42:45

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#252 2007-02-21 17:37:42

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#253 2007-02-21 18:35:40

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#254 2007-02-24 09:13:29

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#255 2007-02-24 15:06:28

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#256 2007-02-24 15:19:14

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#257 2007-02-24 15:40:11

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#258 2007-02-24 15:41:39

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#259 2007-02-24 16:58:13

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#260 2007-02-24 17:30:02

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#261 2007-02-24 19:45:45

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#262 2007-02-25 10:51:38

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#263 2007-02-25 10:58:36

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#264 2007-02-25 13:31:27

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#265 2007-02-25 17:37:06

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#266 2007-02-25 20:05:17

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#267 2007-02-25 20:52:07

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#268 2007-02-26 09:14:35

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#269 2007-02-26 20:14:32

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#270 2007-02-26 20:40:25

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#271 2007-02-26 21:44:32

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#272 2007-02-27 07:11:29

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#273 2007-02-27 13:32:02

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#274 2007-02-28 23:29:24

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

#275 2007-02-28 23:31:42

Re: 0.8 alpha/beta and final Voodoo installation feedback

Board footer