Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 1:01 PM:
> So, non-free firmware is normally moved to non-free instead of being dropped
> from Debian entirely for many years now. Drivers that were previously dropped
> because of non-free firmware might be added back in, if they can be modified
> to use request_firmware(). Filing a bug might be appropriate here.
So how do you make this jibe with the case of the RTL 8168/9 in Squeeze
2.6.32, where the driver exists and loads, yet can't find the firmware blob,
then fails?
I'm talking the Squeeze 2.6.32 kernel. There was a lengthy thread a month
ago. An OP's RTL 8169 wouldn't function because the new kernel couldn't
load the firmware blob. My investigation shows the Debian kernel team (not
upstream) removed the firmware blob as they deemed it "non-free". Dig up
the old post for details.
>From what you're saying, it should have still been distributed somewhere
into the filesystem and findable by the kernel, so as to not brick the
users' ethernet, no?
Well, it didn't happen. The firmware blob was completely ripped out by the
Debian kernel team and or other devs and now bricks RTL 8168/9 interfaces.
I am asking you about this specific case, not about whether the Debian
kernel team are normally "good and flawless".
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4B83A91B.8040703@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4B83A91B.8040703@hardwarefreak.com
02-23-2010, 10:36 AM
Stan Hoeppner
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
> Stan --
>
> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
> distribution, I have at least two options: going to the Realtek site and
> downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
> source on kernel.org. Does that sound about right?
>
> As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
> how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
> motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
> them?
Given the length of one of my recent posts, you may have missed this at the
bottom. To save yourself a lot of potential headache getting Debian
installed and running, and keeping it running, you should really get this
Intel motherboard, and not the Gibabyte or any others, specifically due to
the onboard Intel Pro 1000 GigE chip. It'll give superior performance
compared to either the Realtek or Marvell, and you'll never have a
compatibility issue with it WRT Linux/Debian drivers. The Realtek
8111/8168/8169 has had such recent problems.
I've never heard of a Linux problem relating to an Intel ethernet chip.
They're just rock solid. I use nothing else in my Debian servers due to
problems with DEC 211x0 chips and some 3COM chips in the past. 3COM used to
be the gold standard, but as I said, I had Linux problems with some 3C59x
and 3C90x cards and switched to Intel. I've never looked back.
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4B83BDD0.7060609@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4B83BDD0.7060609@hardwarefreak.com
02-23-2010, 12:22 PM
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
In <4B83A91B.8040703@hardwarefreak.com>, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/22/2010 1:01 PM:
>> So, non-free firmware is normally moved to non-free instead of being
>> dropped from Debian entirely for many years now. Drivers that were
>> previously dropped because of non-free firmware might be added back in, if
>> they can be modified to use request_firmware(). Filing a bug might be
>> appropriate here.
>
>So how do you make this jibe with the case of the RTL 8168/9 in Squeeze
>2.6.32, where the driver exists and loads, yet can't find the firmware blob,
>then fails?
Have you installed the appropriate -firmware package from non-free? Since it
is not DFSG-free, that's where it would be. It wouldn't be in the linux-
kernel-image package in main.
>>From what you're saying, it should have still been distributed somewhere
>into the filesystem and findable by the kernel, so as to not brick the
>users' ethernet, no?
If they installed the correct package. Yes. It is not distributed as part of
the linux-kernel-image package in main. It should have been broken out into
its own package (or into a package with similar firmware) and put into non-
free.
I can't find the firmware package for that piece of hardware. A bug report
may be appropriate. I could not find one that discussed a DFSG violation
w.r.t. the firmware for these devices. A patch to the kernel dsc to generate
the new -firmware package, and (if needed) convert the module to using
request_firmware() would certainly be appreciated.
After installing the linux-patch-debian-2.6.32 package, these files might
clarify the situation:
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/debian/dfsg/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
disable.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-init-phy-return-
error.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
request_firmware-2.patch.bz2
/usr/src/kernel-patches/all/2.6.32/debian/features/all/r8169-rtl8168d-1-2-
request_firmware.patch.bz2
>Well, it didn't happen. The firmware blob was completely ripped out by the
>Debian kernel team and or other devs and now bricks RTL 8168/9 interfaces.
While it could happen in the future, there's no system in place (AFAIK) for
the system to recommend certain packages based on the user's hardware profile.
It is very easy to be missing the firmware because you a missing a package.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
02-23-2010, 12:26 PM
Johan Kullstam
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com> writes:
> Peter Tenenbaum put forth on 2/21/2010 10:01 PM:
>> Stan --
>>
>> It sounds like, if the Realtek drivers are not present on the Debian
>> distribution, I have at least two options: going to the Realtek site and
>> downloading their linux 64 bit drivers, or compiling my own kernel from
>> source on kernel.org. Does that sound about right?
>>
>> As far as video cards are concerned, I have a (probably) ignorant question:
>> how do I put the integrated northbridge video support to use on these
>> motherboards, since they do not appear to have any video output spigots on
>> them?
>
> Given the length of one of my recent posts, you may have missed this at the
> bottom. To save yourself a lot of potential headache getting Debian
> installed and running, and keeping it running, you should really get this
> Intel motherboard, and not the Gibabyte or any others, specifically due to
> the onboard Intel Pro 1000 GigE chip. It'll give superior performance
> compared to either the Realtek or Marvell, and you'll never have a
> compatibility issue with it WRT Linux/Debian drivers. The Realtek
> 8111/8168/8169 has had such recent problems.
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121394
>
> I've never heard of a Linux problem relating to an Intel ethernet chip.
> They're just rock solid. I use nothing else in my Debian servers due to
> problems with DEC 211x0 chips and some 3COM chips in the past. 3COM used to
> be the gold standard, but as I said, I had Linux problems with some 3C59x
> and 3C90x cards and switched to Intel. I've never looked back.
Lightning zapped my 3c905b. The cumputer had a surge protector, but the
cable side of the cable modem didn't. It wiped out my whole wired
network. DEC tulips were great but the drivers have suffered bit rot
since their heyday in the 90s.
After having trouble with the Realtek motherboard built-in ethernet, I
just sprung for a PCI Intel ethernet. They are only like $30.
I hate Realtek ethernet, but it is very hard to find a motherboard with
anything else on it. Thanks for the information.
--
Johan KULLSTAM
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 873a0snkv7.fsf@emmy.axel.nom">http://lists.debian.org/873a0snkv7.fsf@emmy.axel.nom
02-23-2010, 02:40 PM
Stan Hoeppner
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/23/2010 7:22 AM:
> While it could happen in the future, there's no system in place (AFAIK) for
> the system to recommend certain packages based on the user's hardware profile.
> It is very easy to be missing the firmware because you a missing a package.
Yeah, no kidding. It's a crappy system. Layers of additional complexity
and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free". This is one of the
many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source. I love Debian,
but I don't care for the Debian kernels. But I'm getting OT now, and this
thread needs to die.
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4B83F6DA.60607@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4B83F6DA.60607@hardwarefreak.com
02-23-2010, 02:49 PM
Stan Hoeppner
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Johan Kullstam put forth on 2/23/2010 7:26 AM:
> After having trouble with the Realtek motherboard built-in ethernet, I
> just sprung for a PCI Intel ethernet. They are only like $30.
Goto Newegg and look at all the cards. You can get a PCI GigE Realtek card
for $7. Seven f--king USD. That's 1/4 the price of the cheapest Intel PCI
GigE card. Look at ICs in volume, and the pricing on the RTL 816x chips is
less than $1, the Intel chips a few dollars.
Considering how important network connectivity is today, why would someone
spend $7 for an el crapo ethernet device when they can spend $30 and know
they'll probably never have a problem with it?
> I hate Realtek ethernet, but it is very hard to find a motherboard with
> anything else on it. Thanks for the information.
They're integrated on so darn many motherboards because they're so $deity
damn cheap. This is exactly the reason you see so few mobos with Intel
ethernet on board-- it's not cheap. Most boards with Intel ethernet onboard
are server and workstation boards, and some high end enthusiast desktop mobos.
The old adage is still true: "You get what you pay for."
--
Stan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4B83F923.7080208@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4B83F923.7080208@hardwarefreak.com
02-23-2010, 03:04 PM
"Boyd Stephen Smith Jr."
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
On Tuesday 23 February 2010 09:40:10 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> It's a crappy system. Layers of additional complexity
> and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free". This is one of the
> many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source. I love Debian,
> but I don't care for the Debian kernels. But I'm getting OT now, and this
> thread needs to die.
Debian was founded with the DFSG as one of its guiding documents. I share the
values expressed in the document, and am opposed to Debian shirking any of the
requirements therein.
It would be nice if the Linux kernel team provided source tarballs consistent
with those same principles. When they do not, I am glad the Debian kernel
team takes on the task of preparing packages that are consistent with those
principles.
Free Software has never been without cost. Sometimes that cost is time and
complexity. Sometimes that cost is incompatibility with proprietary systems.
Sometimes that cost is lack of features. The Free Software community shares
these costs and eliminates them where it is legally and technically possible.
In any case, I also agree that the thread needs to end. I will try to make
this my last post in it.
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
02-23-2010, 10:54 PM
Mark Allums
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
On 2/23/2010 12:43 AM, Jacek Politowski wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:32:55PM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
It's true, you can have large memory with i386, but why?
To have still the most compatible system?
Some legacy apps may still be available only as 32-bit.
Theoretically most of the 32-bit software should run fine on 64-bit
kernel with 32-bit userland, but it's not true for all of it -
take Virtualbox as an example. Virtualbox is the reason why I haven't
switched to amd64 kernel, I'm waiting for multiarch support in Debian
(which of course will not help for apps available only as 32-bit and
not compatible with 64-bit kernel, but I don't think I use any of
them).
Yes, I know I could switch to a fully amd64 desktop, yet it's a
not-as-easy-as-it-looks and time-consuming process.
For existing systems, I recommend sticking with what you already have,
but for new systems, I recommend 64-bit. Most newbies are not saddled
with legacy apps.
Mark Allums
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Correct binary for Intel Core i5
