Ubuntu 8.04 LTS Alpha 6

[marakaid]

Since upgrading a computer with Gutsy 7.10 to Hardy Alpha6, browsing the web is real slow; pages take too many second to start loading.

I've tried disabling IPv6 support in Firefox 3 beta 3 config but no luck, same with installing Firefox 2 from the repositories.

[VaHyper]

I like that the wallpaper has a hardy heron theme, they should continue with a wallpaper with a release specific animal imo

[Kano]

That option must be on! It is not needed to recompile the kernel at all, as you can hotfix it with blacklisting for 2.6.24 kernels. update-initramfs -u will update the initrd for the current kernel. so the most easy way is to use vbox (with desktop iso) or something similar, do the blacklist, run the update-initramfs -u command, reuse the new /boot/initrd.img-$(uname -r) as casper/initrd.gz of the desktop iso - for beginners use isomaster for that part.

[Melcar]

grep PATA_AMD /boot/config-$(uname -r)
CONFIG_PATA_AMD=m

should be there. The blacklist hack is usually working too... You can not boot a hd image without changeing the root option. thats not fully trivial to do that. Compared to that extracting the initrd and putting it back to gether (with added blacklist) then modifiying the iso image is more easy.

Found that option, but even if I compile with it off, the kernel is still unable to boot, and finishes with the error from my previous post. The problem is elsewhere it seems.

[Kano]

grep PATA_AMD /boot/config-$(uname -r)
CONFIG_PATA_AMD=m

should be there. The blacklist hack is usually working too... You can not boot a hd image without changeing the root option. thats not fully trivial to do that. Compared to that extracting the initrd and putting it back to gether (with added blacklist) then modifiying the iso image is more easy.

[Melcar]

Compiled a new 2.6.24.3 kernel without that amd module, but it would not load again. Tried booting a Hardy image I got a hold of yesterday, but it would not load either. Both give me the same result:

Check root= bootarg cat /proc/cmdline
or missing modules, devices: cat /proc/modules ls /dev

ALERT! /dev/disk /by-uuid /2722354a-a243-4baa-8ef5-447c5-6c42 does not exist, dropping to shell!

BusyBox v1.1.3 (Debian 1:1.1.3-5ubuntu7) Built-in shell (ash)
Enter 'help' for a list of built-in commands

(initramfs) [ 246.237572] usb 2-1: device not accepting address 2, error

Shame. Really wanted to take a sneak peak at Hardy.

[Svartalf]

No joke, the desktop image is actually something that stands out from the previous ones in large way. I'm sure this will be something that some people won't like, but I'm impressed so far with the look.

No kidding... It's...striking. That's the best way to describe it.

I kind of like it on first blush. Not to mention that you can ALWAYS change it all up anyhow... >:-)

[Kano]

It can be easyly disabled, but you need to install it first because the current initramfs code does not support a blacklist option. Here are 2 examples:

AMD:
echo blacklist via82cxxx > /etc/modprobe.d/custom-blacklist

VIA:
echo blacklist amd74xx > /etc/modprobe.d/custom-blacklist

Then:

update-initramfs -u

Note: you can not do that with a 2.6.22 kernel, only 2.6.24 has the needed pata driver!

[Melcar]

I told the developers already about the problem to disable the amd74xx module - this makes really trouble and is not needed as pata_amd replaces it and is also there. I don't like legacy ide drivers at all, as most of the new pata ones work fine - the via82cxxx is also not needed. What I really dislike about U is that you can tell em everything and they don't do something until you write a bug report in launchpad. Maybe they think if something breaks you can point to the bug and write it was not my idea, it was the other one...

Can that amd74xx module be easily disabled if I compile my own kernel? If so, where should I look for it? I just hope that whatever is causing this is fixed by the time Hardy is out.

[Kano]

I told the developers already about the problem to disable the amd74xx module - this makes really trouble and is not needed as pata_amd replaces it and is also there. I don't like legacy ide drivers at all, as most of the new pata ones work fine - the via82cxxx is also not needed. What I really dislike about U is that you can tell em everything and they don't do something until you write a bug report in launchpad. Maybe they think if something breaks you can point to the bug and write it was not my idea, it was the other one...