patch 04 was superseded by patch 6, but in any event, none of the patches took (they were assumed to be -r). Also, the other epia-m item (29) is in the tree, so I closed that.
please, folks, if you are resolving these issues, set the status to resolved and sign it off in comments.
Here is the rough path for using this tracker (we're still waiting on the doc)
login to the issue tracker. create the issue describe the problem upload the file (x.diff) assign to somebody.
somebody else should close the issue, so: - get somebody to review. - annoy us if we don't.
to close - if it is global impact, scan carefully. take your time - if it is only one mobo, one person, the person who sent the diff, scan carefully but try to get it done soon. - apply the diff, if it succeeds commit and mark the issue resolved, with 'signed-off-by' in the remarks
- if it fails mark it deferred and notify the submitter
I am going to try nick barker's patch. It seems somebody is applying these and not following up?
ron
* Ronald G Minnich rminnich@lanl.gov [051122 00:57]:
I am going to try nick barker's patch. It seems somebody is applying these and not following up?
I grabbed that patch from the mailing list without checking. It might have been applied already before the issue tracker existed. not sure.
Stefan
Stefan Reinauer wrote:
- Ronald G Minnich rminnich@lanl.gov [051122 00:57]:
I am going to try nick barker's patch. It seems somebody is applying these and not following up?
I grabbed that patch from the mailing list without checking. It might have been applied already before the issue tracker existed. not sure.
Stefan
it had not been applied. It is now applied.
Will epia-m folks please try this out?
thanks
ron
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:57:08PM -0700, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
patch 04 was superseded by patch 6, but in any event, none of the patches took (they were assumed to be -r). Also, the other epia-m item (29) is in the tree, so I closed that.
please, folks, if you are resolving these issues, set the status to resolved and sign it off in comments.
...
I am going to try nick barker's patch. It seems somebody is applying these and not following up?
The patches in issue 28 were applied before the issue tracker was in use I believe (I applied them, after posting them to the list for comments). I added a comment to issue 28 saying as much and that Nick's work built on them on 2005-11-13.12:57:49
I haven't tried svn today, but I've been running LB SVN 2083 + Nick's patch and it appears to work fine (though I'm not using the VGA support as I don't need it).
J.
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
I haven't tried svn today, but I've been running LB SVN 2083 + Nick's patch and it appears to work fine (though I'm not using the VGA support as I don't need it).
thanks for the feedback, if you can, please do an svn update and let me know.
I'll try to do same today for sc 520
ron
On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 09:41:17AM -0700, Ronald G Minnich wrote:
Jonathan McDowell wrote:
I haven't tried svn today, but I've been running LB SVN 2083 + Nick's patch and it appears to work fine (though I'm not using the VGA support as I don't need it).
thanks for the feedback, if you can, please do an svn update and let me know.
SVN r2102 works fine for me on EPIA-M without VGA.
I've tried to use the VGA BIOS from the 1.16 BIOS (I0100116.bin, the latest on Via's website), with no joy.
My 64K image had md5sum:
9c191ed37f60ed1b87f00a3203b56d1c vgabios.bin
And my serial output around the VGA init is:
CPU #0 Initialized write_protect_vgabios biosint: Oops, exception 13 BIOSINT: Unsupport int #0x10 Devices initialized Copying IRQ routing tables to 0xf0000...done.
This isn't critical for me, but VGA support would be nice to have if anyone who has it working has any suggestions. Are those who have it working using EPIA M or M-II boards?
J.
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:33:01 +0000 Jonathan McDowell noodles@earth.li wrote:
This isn't critical for me, but VGA support would be nice to have if anyone who has it working has any suggestions. Are those who have it working using EPIA M or M-II boards?
Sure ;-) Me, for instance.
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 03:03:21PM +0300, Anton Borisov wrote:
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:33:01 +0000 Jonathan McDowell noodles@earth.li wrote:
This isn't critical for me, but VGA support would be nice to have if anyone who has it working has any suggestions. Are those who have it working using EPIA M or M-II boards?
Sure ;-) Me, for instance.
Sorry, perhaps I should have been clearer. Are the reports of success with VGA from those using EPIA M-II boards? Has anyone succeeded with the EPIA-M board?
If the EPIA-M, what BIOS version did you extract the VGA bios from and what's the md5sum?
J.
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 02:11:37PM +0000, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 03:03:21PM +0300, Anton Borisov wrote:
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:33:01 +0000 Jonathan McDowell noodles@earth.li wrote:
This isn't critical for me, but VGA support would be nice to have if anyone who has it working has any suggestions. Are those who have it working using EPIA M or M-II boards?
Sure ;-) Me, for instance.
Sorry, perhaps I should have been clearer. Are the reports of success with VGA from those using EPIA M-II boards? Has anyone succeeded with the EPIA-M board?
Having had further conversation with Anton offlist it appears that the key to success is to use the 1.1.13 BIOS rather than the 1.1.16 version. With 1.1.13 VGA works fine for me on a 1GHz EPIA-M board.
I couldn't find the 1.1.13 BIOS linked on Via's site, but it can still be downloaded at:
http://www.via.com.tw/download/mainboards/1/0/i0100113.bin
J.
-
Anton Borisov -
Jonathan McDowell -
Ronald G Minnich -
Stefan Reinauer