(8th Nov, 2013 05:13 PM)nsviper Wrote: [ -> ]Possible bug?
config.txt has hdmi_ignore_cec_init=1 in file, buts its ignored 
so when I turn on Pi, TV gets switched over to its HDMI channel - worked fine in alpha5
Resolved.
As well as the line in config.txt, I had to go into XBMC Settings, Peripherals, CEC, and untick the "Make XBMC the active source"
(10th Nov, 2013 10:03 PM)raspberry_pd Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks to everyone for the hard work on the next version. Any chance we will see a stable version one point zero before 2014?
Xbian 1.0 is on the cards - it will be Gotham with a few little extras. Due to the work done - mainly by @
mk01 - upgrading is easy, as dependencies have almost been eliminated (FLW).
Beta 2 is as stable as any Xbian I have had the pleasure to work on, so we will build on that.
(13th Nov, 2013 02:35 AM)IriDium Wrote: [ -> ] (10th Nov, 2013 10:03 PM)raspberry_pd Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks to everyone for the hard work on the next version. Any chance we will see a stable version one point zero before 2014?
Xbian 1.0 is on the cards - it will be Gotham with a few little extras. Due to the work done - mainly by @mk01 - upgrading is easy, as dependencies have almost been eliminated (FLW).
Beta 2 is as stable as any Xbian I have had the pleasure to work on, so we will build on that.
I definitely agree with this statement. I will go as far as saying Beta 2 has been the most stable OS I've ran since getting my first Raspberry! Awesome work guys!
(11th Nov, 2013 08:06 PM)Klimaks Wrote: [ -> ]
Code:
sudo mount -t nfs 192.168.1.99:Media /mnt/test
mount.nfs: access denied by server while mounting 192.168.1.99:Media
This is the content of /etc/exports on my synology (which as been ok for 1.1)
Code:
/volume1/Media *(rw,async,no_wdelay,insecure,no_root_squash,sec=sys,anonuid=0,anongid=0)~
this would be one of the issues which are appearing with updates to base system .there is already one discussion regarding nfs and strange changes in the packages (portmap, nfslibs etc).
just quick look to your mount and export. I assume your synology is creating this as nfs3/2 export, … but your command syntax is asking for nfs4 to try first. Definitely what will be tried at the beginning is /media on synology and nfs4.
I'm fine with the permission denied in such case. try mounting "192.168.1.99:/volume1/Media" ?
(11th Nov, 2013 12:42 AM)f1vefour Wrote: [ -> ] (5th Nov, 2013 01:20 AM)mk01 Wrote: [ -> ] (3rd Nov, 2013 09:08 AM)f1vefour Wrote: [ -> ]No other daemons are running.
From 'ps ax' after I run lircd the running command is simply 'lircd' with no trailing arguments.
ok isn't this caused by the -u parameter (when used by lirc)? two-three posts have been there about it already.
It is caused by the -u parameter, it should be removed.
@
CurlyMo,
any comment to -u (uinput) usage there ? It has been always there since I remember. I don't want to break lirc again.
(9th Nov, 2013 09:20 PM)CurlyMo Wrote: [ -> ]I've noticed a small but significant bug in the deb package generator scripts.
Some of the scripts calculate the package size by running the following command.
Code:
printf "Installed-Size: %d\n" $(du -s ./content | awk '{print $1}') >> ./content/DEBIAN/control
This will generate a wrong installed size for a package.
true. you are right.
and it is not the only bug there. that's why packages with significant size and content causing the bugs to realize (spaces in file names, binaries & libs are not always stripped before packaging - others I don't remember) had the script updated some time ago already. those "lucky" packages have always been xbmc, kernel, headers, … this gen.package script should have been distributed to other packages …
will happen latest with moving beta2 to pub - and packages with wrong info file repacked.
(6th Nov, 2013 09:34 PM)rikardo1979 Wrote: [ -> ]@mk01 can we keep OP post updated please? I mean like a DL link for the latest testing image?
-thx-
was and is … or is not working for you the link ?
(7th Nov, 2013 05:00 AM)adepssimius Wrote: [ -> ]I resolved this already. I was able to fix with an
Terminal
apt-get -f install
yes, … because based on feedback like yours and some others (very old versions going to be updated or too much dep changes for new packages - or too strict deps in new) we are updating also the control files for deb packages now and then and not only to reflect latest XBian's versions of packages - but also to help APT to choose different order while installing debs or to mitigate number of kept back for older installs etc.
(13th Nov, 2013 01:04 PM)mk01 Wrote: [ -> ]@CurlyMo,
any comment to -u (uinput) usage there ? It has been always there since I remember. I don't want to break lirc again.
If i remove it from the lirc_rpi hardware file, it still works. Can't test the others. If you're not sure, you can just remove the -u parameter from those hardware files users have tested. In this case, removing the -u from the lirc_rpi.conf is a safe removal.
Another tip i just came across. If you want to manually compare apt versions you can use this script:
http://svn.openmoko.org/trunk/src/host/opkg-utils/opkg-compare-versions.c
My implementation is far inferior to this one.
I get:
Err
http://xbian.brantje.com/devel/ wheezy/main xbian-package- │
│ 404 Not Found
All the time when I try apt-get update and deb upgrades via config/ssh. Server down?
(15th Nov, 2013 08:25 PM)zilexa Wrote: [ -> ]I get:
Err http://xbian.brantje.com/devel/ wheezy/main xbian-package- │
│ 404 Not Found
All the time when I try apt-get update and deb upgrades via config/ssh. Server down?
Major changes are happening, mk01 will post instructions soon.
(15th Nov, 2013 10:36 PM)rikardo1979 Wrote: [ -> ] (15th Nov, 2013 10:34 PM)f1vefour Wrote: [ -> ] (15th Nov, 2013 08:25 PM)zilexa Wrote: [ -> ]I get:
Err http://xbian.brantje.com/devel/ wheezy/main xbian-package- │
│ 404 Not Found
All the time when I try apt-get update and deb upgrades via config/ssh. Server down?
Major changes are happening, mk01 will post instructions soon.
you mean http://forum.xbian.org/thread-1768.html
I do, thanks for linking.
The updates succeeded. Great to hear the upgrade beta2 has been released! Hope the full install version/image will be released soon as well.
Do we need to change anything (most likely repos?) to get on the released version of Beta 2?
(16th Nov, 2013 02:26 AM)Smultie Wrote: [ -> ]Do we need to change anything (most likely repos?) to get on the released version of Beta 2?
Change back to the default XBian repo.
The latest apt is quite a mess
1.
In
this link you can see the InRelease, Package, etc file. Those files
should only be in the
http://xbian.brantje.com/dists/ folder.
2. The Package files in the dists/devel and dists/staging folders are empty.
3. The root devel folder is a symlink to itself.
4. I've you have used my latest update.sh code, you don't need to change the gpg keys.
So... Would you sugest to go back to the original repo and update now or wait until they are done?
(16th Nov, 2013 04:07 AM)CurlyMo Wrote: [ -> ]The latest apt is quite a mess
1.
In this link you can see the InRelease, Package, etc file. Those files
should only be in the http://xbian.brantje.com/dists/ folder.
2. The Package files in the dists/devel and dists/staging folders are empty.
3. The root devel folder is a symlink to itself.
4. I've you have used my latest update.sh code, you don't need to change the gpg keys.
LOL, in other words wait until things are straightened out.