Re: iBook 2.2 with new board, full of problems
>El mar, 02-03-2004 a las 14:39, Kristian Peters escribiÃ³:
> Alberto Viniegra Ilarregui <firstname.lastname@example.org> schrieb:
> > In my iBook I have problems when it is hot, in 2.4 and in 2.6
> > If I keep ibook in a very cold place, compiling is OK, system is OK,
> > I dont live in an icebox, he :)
> > There are many things crashing besides compiling, system crashes in
> > ways, I remind that all this problems are happening me since the
> > was changed cause the display failure, before system works without
> > problem allways. I'm getting mad looking for the reason.
> Could you verify your problems and crashes with 2.4.20-ben and preempt
>disabled ? I have exactly the same model and never experienced any
>problems during the summer months (even with preempt enabled !). Except
>that my iBook was getting very hot and the fan was spinning all the
revision : 2.3 (pvr 7000 0203)****do you use same revision?????
bogomips : 1785.85
machine : PowerBook4,3
motherboard : PowerBook4,3 MacRISC2 MacRISC Power Macintosh
This is the only difference I have with a friend's ibook, he dont have
problems, and I am only getting problems now with new revision board.
please look for your revision and send me the /proc/cpuinfo.
> I'm still using an ancient Woody with a self-compiled X-Free 4.2 +
>Michael DÃ¤nzers drivers.
I use Linux 2.6.3-ben2, gcc3.3.3, XFree86 Version 22.214.171.124 (DRI trunk),
I am not sure if it is a hardware failure issue, maybe my new board is
not fully supported?, cause osx works fine, I am testing with gcc and
till now works, but I only compiled small soft, like wget, bash.
I'm going to try with x server, and reproduce the bug, if not... It must
be a linux ussue with my new board may be?
> You should remote login to you iBook via ssh or something similar and
>try to catch any log-messages. Maybe we can read something out of the
> *.* |/dev/xlog
> tail -f /dev/xlog as root.
> Hope we can trigger something.
> You can test the shell fork-bomb too. (Your computer will be
>unresponsive for quite some minutes. ;) But this is not a real
>stress-test, so better beware of any problems !