Hi,
I cannot boot 0.6.1 images either. 0.5.x boots and works just fine. When I try 0.6.1 all the front leds stay on and it behaves that it is probably not even able to load the kernel. I am getting a serial usb dongle and will try then to see what happens in the serial console.
If there are multiple versions of the board out there, who can we tell which one we have (and what has been released)?
Jussi
(12-15-2017, 09:54 AM)eloranta Wrote: Hi,
I cannot boot 0.6.1 images either. 0.5.x boots and works just fine. When I try 0.6.1 all the front leds stay on and it behaves that it is probably not even able to load the kernel. I am getting a serial usb dongle and will try then to see what happens in the serial console.
If there are multiple versions of the board out there, who can we tell which one we have (and what has been released)?
Jussi
I agree, what good are newer images that don't boot.
From this list https://github.com/ayufan-rock64/linux-build/tags I only can use 0.5.x images.
Pine64 should slowly start reading this forum & fixing some of the basic errors, so new users get frustrated and return this product.
What good is a help full IRC forum if even the basic images they recommend like 05.15 still don't work 100%, and why is the WIKI only pointing to the latest image version 0.5.10??
For me even 0.5.15 image only usable on my TV, as my Monitor is fixed to 800x600 resolution. A sudo apt-get dist-upgrade from this version to 0.6.x is not possible.
12-16-2017, 10:04 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-16-2017, 10:09 AM by Luke.)
(12-16-2017, 04:52 AM)Rar9 Wrote: (12-15-2017, 09:54 AM)eloranta Wrote: Hi,
I cannot boot 0.6.1 images either. 0.5.x boots and works just fine. When I try 0.6.1 all the front leds stay on and it behaves that it is probably not even able to load the kernel. I am getting a serial usb dongle and will try then to see what happens in the serial console.
If there are multiple versions of the board out there, who can we tell which one we have (and what has been released)?
Jussi
I agree, what good are newer images that don't boot.
From this list https://github.com/ayufan-rock64/linux-build/tags I only can use 0.5.x images.
Pine64 should slowly start reading this forum & fixing some of the basic errors, so new users get frustrated and return this product.
What good is a help full IRC forum if even the basic images they recommend like 05.15 still don't work 100%, and why is the WIKI only pointing to the latest image version 0.5.10??
For me even 0.5.15 image only usable on my TV, as my Monitor is fixed to 800x600 resolution. A sudo apt-get dist-upgrade from this version to 0.6.x is not possible.
I encourage you to do a bit of reading and thinking before you write:
Quote:what good are newer images that don't boot
The images you're referring to 0.6.X are labelled "Pre-release" and on the git download page it clearly states that the image is 'Highly experimental' ... in bold letters I may add. They are there for developers to determine what works and what doesn't.
Quote:why is the WIKI only pointing to the latest image version 0.5.10??
Because its the last image labelled 'Release', and unlike 're-release' images its stable.
Quote:Pine64 should slowly start reading this forum & fixing some of the basic errors
The images you're relating to are developed by ayufan not PINE64.
Quote:What good is a help full IRC forum if even the basic images they recommend like 05.15 still don't work 100%
If you'd read the IRC log perhaps you'd read the following:
Quote:13/12/17 23:18
<lukasz> ayufan1: I saw you wrote you're planning a new desktop release for the Rock64 ?
13/12/17 23:19
<ayufan1> lukasz: yes, with the fix
13/12/17 23:19
<ayufan1> I’m slowly progressing with next steps
13/12/17 23:19
<lukasz> ayufan1: ok thanks 
13/12/17 23:19
<ayufan1> now have to recompile all external packages and update them
13/12/17 23:20
<lukasz> neat looking forward to it
13/12/17 23:21
<evilbunny> any more bug fixes?
13/12/17 23:22
<ayufan1> streamline all graphics fixes, and release a pre-alpha release of bionic
13/12/17 23:24
<Xalius> yeah finally a new LTS
13/12/17 23:24
<ayufan1> this means that I will leave only xenial and bionic in a near future
Quote:my Monitor is fixed to 800x600 resolution.
Kwiboo offered an explanation when you asked in IRC ... go read the response maybe ?
Quote: A sudo apt-get dist-upgrade from this version to 0.6.x is not possible.
Wrong. ClaudiaF offered an explanation of how-to do it ... but unlike you she correctly identified the 0.6.X image as 'pre-release' and warned the OP against updating .... which ayufan also did when you asked him in IRC.
I suggest you click this link.
Since rock64 is a rather homogeneous piece of hardware, the devs should easily be able to find out if the image works or not. Why release an image (even experimental) at all if it clearly does not even boot? No point in doing that - it just creates confusion. People may have all sorts of problems with this new platform and often want to find out if the issues they are having might be fixed in the upcoming pre-release. Like I am currently having issues with usb3.
And, yes, we all can read - no need to be cocky about that.
12-16-2017, 01:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-16-2017, 01:27 PM by Luke.)
(12-16-2017, 12:09 PM)eloranta Wrote: Since rock64 is a rather homogeneous piece of hardware, the devs should easily be able to find out if the image works or not. Why release an image (even experimental) at all if it clearly does not even boot? No point in doing that - it just creates confusion. People may have all sorts of problems with this new platform and often want to find out if the issues they are having might be fixed in the upcoming pre-release. Like I am currently having issues with usb3.
And, yes, we all can read - no need to be cocky about that.
Wasn't cocky towards you - I was quite specific in my responses above.
On the subject of the image in question; it boots on some boards but not on others, and the reason for this is still not 100% clear. The purpose of pre-releases is to determine whether something does or does not work; The developer also needs feedback and contributions to continue the progress on the image.
While I understand that people want to run pre-release images, they should not complain about features not working (or the image not working at all) if the pre-release is marked highly experimental.
(12-16-2017, 01:21 PM)Luke Wrote: On the subject of the image in question; it boots on some boards but not on others, and the reason for this is still not 100% clear. The purpose of pre-releases is to determine whether something does or does not work; The developer also needs feedback and contributions to continue the progress on the image. OK, thanks this is good to know and explains a lot. Do you know how many different board revisions are out there and how to identify which one I have?
(12-16-2017, 01:52 PM)eloranta Wrote: (12-16-2017, 01:21 PM)Luke Wrote: On the subject of the image in question; it boots on some boards but not on others, and the reason for this is still not 100% clear. The purpose of pre-releases is to determine whether something does or does not work; The developer also needs feedback and contributions to continue the progress on the image. OK, thanks this is good to know and explains a lot. Do you know how many different board revisions are out there and how to identify which one I have? Nice to know, but how hard is it to just write this important info to the image page.? I believe it would save many people hours of debugging.
(12-16-2017, 02:15 PM)Rar9 Wrote: (12-16-2017, 01:52 PM)eloranta Wrote: (12-16-2017, 01:21 PM)Luke Wrote: On the subject of the image in question; it boots on some boards but not on others, and the reason for this is still not 100% clear. The purpose of pre-releases is to determine whether something does or does not work; The developer also needs feedback and contributions to continue the progress on the image. OK, thanks this is good to know and explains a lot. Do you know how many different board revisions are out there and how to identify which one I have? Nice to know, but how hard is it to just write this important info to the image page.? I believe it would save many people hours of debugging.
The newest build released yesterday boots up and actually correctly outputs HDMI display : now if only I could get it to read the custom settings I'm trying to put in boot/config.txt
(12-20-2017, 08:06 AM)Mrfixit2001 Wrote: (12-16-2017, 02:15 PM)Rar9 Wrote: (12-16-2017, 01:52 PM)eloranta Wrote: (12-16-2017, 01:21 PM)Luke Wrote: On the subject of the image in question; it boots on some boards but not on others, and the reason for this is still not 100% clear. The purpose of pre-releases is to determine whether something does or does not work; The developer also needs feedback and contributions to continue the progress on the image. OK, thanks this is good to know and explains a lot. Do you know how many different board revisions are out there and how to identify which one I have? Nice to know, but how hard is it to just write this important info to the image page.? I believe it would save many people hours of debugging.
The newest build released yesterday boots up and actually correctly outputs HDMI display : now if only I could get it to read the custom settings I'm trying to put in boot/config.txt
Yea, the bionic release even outputs to 4k and 2k I noticed (haven't tried 0.6.3 Xenial). Disabling the window compositor really does have a big impact on performance, so if you want to run a DE then I suggest you do that.
I see 0.64 is showing in the releases section. No files or info of what's changed. Hope this USB 3.0 issue that's mentioned will be fixed. Can't test yet as my rock64 is still coming from China to Australia but am really excited to test with a xenial release. Great to see so many updates coming through all the time
|
