Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[Solv]

Need help with peripherals or devices?
Message
Author
jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[Solv]

#1 Post by jacobh »

I have an Asus Eee PC with the new Intel Atom N2600 Cedar Trail chip which has integrated graphics. lspci reports:

Code: Select all

VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Atom Processor D2xxx Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 09)
Unfortunately, I do not think this chip is well supported by linux. Therefore, at the moment Xorg is falling back on the VESA driver and running it in 800x600 mode. This makes the laptop barely usable, not least because of the stretching that goes on to fit 800x600 into a 1024x768 ratio.

I was wondering if anyone could help me with any suggested solutions or workarounds?

I think a solution is difficult because I am not sure if the drivers (yet) exist. I read elsewhere that the 3.3.0 kernel would support the Cedar Trail. I’ve installed the 3.3.0 kernel from Experimental which seems to run fine but that does not to affect the launching of X as far as I can tell. I am not sure if I would have to load some extra kernel modules or something to get it working; but I can’t find any documentation about what they would be.

In terms of a workaround, I was wondering if it is possible to put VESA into a 1024 x 768 resolution?

At the moment, it is not loading with any flexibility. xrandr reports:

Code: Select all

xrandr: Failed to get size of gamma for output default
Screen 0: minimum 800 x 600, current 800 x 600, maximum 800 x 600
default connected 800x600+0+0 0mm x 0mm
   800x600        61.0*
Xorg seems to detect the width of the screen (but gives the height as 600) correctly:

Code: Select all

[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): Supported detailed timing:
[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): clock: 54.2 MHz   Image Size:  220 x 129 mm
[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): h_active: 1024  h_sync: 1077  h_sync_end 1112 h_blank_end 1356 h_border: 0
[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): v_active: 600  v_sync: 604  v_sync_end 609 v_blanking: 666 v_border: 0
and polls it for the following setting:

Code: Select all

[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): Printing DDC gathered Modelines:
[    78.325] (II) VESA(0): Modeline "1024x600"x0.0   54.20  1024 1077 1112 1356  600 604 609 666 -hsync -vsync (40.0 kHz)
However, it then all goes wrong:

Code: Select all

[    78.411] (WW) VESA(0): Unable to estimate virtual size
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "800x600" (no mode of this na
me)
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x480" (no mode of this name)
[    78.411] (WW) VESA(0): No valid modes left. Trying less strict filter...
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using hsync value of 39.97 kHz
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using vrefresh value of 60.02 Hz
[    78.411] (WW) VESA(0): Unable to estimate virtual size
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "800x600" (hsync out of range)
[    78.411] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)
[    78.411] (WW) VESA(0): No valid modes left. Trying aggressive sync range...
[    78.412] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using hsync range of 31.50-39.97 kHz
[    78.412] (II) VESA(0): <default monitor>: Using vrefresh range of 50.00-60.02 Hz
[    78.412] (WW) VESA(0): Unable to estimate virtual size
[    78.412] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)
[    78.412] (--) VESA(0): Virtual size is 800x600 (pitch 800)
[    78.412] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "800x600"
To try to get the higher resolution working, I have tried adding the following to /etc/defaults/grub and ran update-grub2:

Code: Select all

GRUB_GFXMODE=1024x768x32
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=1024x768x32
I also tried the second parameter as GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=allow which some other places on the internet suggested as an alternative.

I also tried adding vga=712 and vga=0x318 manually to the boot parameters in grub since these should be the codes for 1028x768 VESA but without success.

In addition to the /var/log/Xorg.0.log log the only other problem that I have seen is that if I try to automatically recreate the Xorg.conf file by killing the display manager and running X -configure it fails with this error:

Code: Select all

(EE) open /dev/fd0: No such file or directory
suggesting that the framebuffer has problems.

Would anyone be able to help me with these problems, either for a solution or a workaround to get the resolution up to scratch?

Many thanks!

-Jacob
Last edited by jacobh on 2012-04-20 12:17, edited 1 time in total.

dtl131
Posts: 449
Joined: 2011-07-11 19:56

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#2 Post by dtl131 »

The Cedar Trail GPU is about a half-step above a paperweight in Linux. The best workaround is to get a system with a GPU that's actually supported in Linux. Anyway...
Try manually setting horizsync and vertrefresh in xorg.conf. The default hsync range is not very large and excludes larger resolutions.

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#3 Post by jacobh »

dtl131 wrote:The Cedar Trail GPU is about a half-step above a paperweight in Linux. The best workaround is to get a system with a GPU that's actually supported in Linux. Anyway...
Yes, I know now, but on the wrong side of a purchase made on the basis that the first Eee was a linux machine so the more recent ones must work, too ;-)
dtl131 wrote:Try manually setting horizsync and vertrefresh in xorg.conf. The default hsync range is not very large and excludes larger resolutions.
Ok, thanks, will try.

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#4 Post by jacobh »

Sorry but could I have some help in writing the xorg.conf file? X -configure fails to generate one due to a “/dev/fb0 Not found” error and I am not sure how to start manually writing one (it’s years and years since I last did it).

I tried:

Code: Select all

Section "Monitor"
        Identifier      "Screen 0"
        HorizSync       30-81
        VertRefresh     56-75
        Option          "UseFBDev"              "true"
        Driver          "fbdev"
EndSection
but X failed to start with a no screens found error. xrandr identifies the screen as “Screen 0” which is why I went for that identifier but that may be wrong.

Thanks!

peter_irich
Posts: 1403
Joined: 2009-09-10 20:15
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#5 Post by peter_irich »

Show all your xorg.conf.
For example, in my xorg.conf

Code: Select all

Section "Monitor"
        Identifier   "Monitor0"
        DisplaySize  307        246
        ModeLine     "1280x1024" 145.69 1280 1376 1512 1744 1024 1025 1028 1071 -HSync +VSync
        Option      "VendorName" "ATI Open Driver"
        Option      "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
        Option      "DPMS" "true"
EndSection
and

Code: Select all

Section "Screen"
        Identifier "Screen0"
        Device     "Device0"
        Monitor    "Monitor0"
        DefaultDepth     24
        SubSection "Display"
                Viewport   0 0
                Depth     24
                Modes    "1280x1024"
        EndSubSection
EndSection
Peter.

dtl131
Posts: 449
Joined: 2011-07-11 19:56

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#6 Post by dtl131 »

You should use vesa (not fbdev) if you want support for changing resolutions.

Ibidem
Posts: 160
Joined: 2010-12-24 18:28

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#7 Post by Ibidem »

Ah, PowerVR bites again. The next Atom should work better, but that's irrelevant.
It will almost certainly NOT be 1024x768: that is the same old 4:3 aspect ratio as 800x600, while almost every netbook uses the 1024x600 screen.

The kernel module should be gma500_gfx or perhaps psb_gfx, from what I read [1][2]-- see if that can be modprobed in.

Code: Select all

#Do the following as root
#check for driver; take care to read the parameters (parm: )
#probaly will include a modeset: (int) line, but maybe not 
modinfo gma500_gfx
#check if the firmware is installed--if not, maybe install linux-firmware-nonfree
modinfo gma500_gfx|grep firmware|awk '{print"/lib/firmware/" $2}'|xargs ls
#Load driver -add parameters as needed
#fbcon is for a console under KMS
modprobe fbcon
modprobe gma500_gfx modeset=1 
#now it should flicker & change resolutions; if so, start X.
[1] http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.p ... -for-Linux
[2] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupport ... rdsPoulsbo

ANother possibility may be 915resolution.mod in grub2, if Debian ships that (I use grub1).
There's also uvesafb for the kernel, but that's a last resort
Thinkpad X100e/Debian Squeeze (All reposiories enabled)/Linux 3.4.11:
1GB RAM/1.6GHz Neo X2/ATI HD 3200/RTL8191SEVA2 wlan0, RTL8169 eth0

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#8 Post by jacobh »

peter_irich wrote:Show all your xorg.conf.
For example, in my xorg.conf
What I showed above was all my Xorg.conf. No file was automatically generated on install and I can’t generate one with X -configure. That’s why I think I need to write one by hand and I’m not quite sure what I should put in (since X Server stuff is not anywhere near a specialty of mine). I’ll try playing around with it again.
dtl131 wrote:You should use vesa (not fbdev) if you want support for changing resolutions.
Ah, thanks. That would make sense.
Ibidem wrote:Ah, PowerVR bites again. The next Atom should work better, but that's irrelevant.
It will almost certainly NOT be 1024x768: that is the same old 4:3 aspect ratio as 800x600, while almost every netbook uses the 1024x600 screen.
Yes, you are quite right; that was my mistake.
Ibidem wrote:The kernel module should be gma500_gfx or perhaps psb_gfx, from what I read [1][2]-- see if that can be modprobed in.
Will this work with the N2600? I wasn’t sure if they were only for the slightly older Atoms with integrated graphics. As far as I can see the drivers are no available in any way within debian. There are some instructions for building the Ubuntu ones which I might try if that’s the only option.
Ibidem wrote:ANother possibility may be 915resolution.mod in grub2, if Debian ships that (I use grub1).
I tried that, but unfortunately it does not work with the N2600. (It also broke grub in all sorts of exciting ways but that’s another story ;-) ).

Thanks for all your help.

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#9 Post by jacobh »

I’ve been playing around with the following in the xorg.conf:

Code: Select all

Section "Device"
    Identifier    "Configured Video Device"
    Driver        "vesa"
EndSection

Section "Monitor"
    Identifier    "Configured Monitor"
    HorizSync 42.0 - 81.0 
    VertRefresh 55.0 - 75.0 
    Modeline "1024x600_75.00"   62.50  1024 1072 1176 1328  600 603 613 629
    Modeline "1024x600_60.00"   49.00  1024 1072 1168 1312  600 603 613 624
    Modeline "800x600" 38.21 800 832 976 1008 600 612 618 631
    Modeline "640x480" 24.11 640 672 760 792 480 490 495 50
EndSection

Section "Screen"
    Identifier    "Default Screen"
    Monitor        "Configured Monitor"
    Device        "Configured Video Device"
    DefaultDepth    24
    Subsection "Display"
        Depth       24
        Modes       "1024x600_75.00" "1024x600_60.00" "800x600" "640x480"
       EndSubsection
EndSection
but this fails with:

Code: Select all

[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Total Memory: 123 64KB banks (7872kB)
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Configured Monitor: Using hsync range of 42.00-81.00 kHz
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Configured Monitor: Using vrefresh range of 55.00-75.00 Hz
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Not using mode "1024x600_75.00" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Not using mode "1024x600_60.00" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "800x600" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.799] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x480" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.799] (WW) VESA(0): No valid modes left. Trying less strict filter...
[ 10000.800] (II) VESA(0): Configured Monitor: Using hsync range of 42.00-81.00 kHz
[ 10000.800] (II) VESA(0): Configured Monitor: Using vrefresh range of 55.00-75.00 Hz
[ 10000.800] (II) VESA(0): Not using mode "1024x600_75.00" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.800] (II) VESA(0): Not using mode "1024x600_60.00" (no mode of this name)
[ 10000.800] (II) VESA(0): Not using built-in mode "640x480" (hsync out of range)
[ 10000.800] (--) VESA(0): Virtual size is 800x600 (pitch 800)
[ 10000.800] (**) VESA(0): *Built-in mode "800x600"
From looking around elsewhere, am I right in thinking I’ll never get this to work with the vesa driver because 1024x600 is not a built in mode?

Ibidem
Posts: 160
Joined: 2010-12-24 18:28

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#10 Post by Ibidem »

jacobh wrote:
Ibidem wrote:Ah, PowerVR bites again. The next Atom should work better, but that's irrelevant.
It will almost certainly NOT be 1024x768: that is the same old 4:3 aspect ratio as 800x600, while almost every netbook uses the 1024x600 screen.
Yes, you are quite right; that was my mistake.
Ibidem wrote:The kernel module should be gma500_gfx or perhaps psb_gfx, from what I read [1][2]-- see if that can be modprobed in.
Will this work with the N2600? I wasn’t sure if they were only for the slightly older Atoms with integrated graphics. As far as I can see the drivers are no available in any way within debian. There are some instructions for building the Ubuntu ones which I might try if that’s the only option.
If you read the references, you would see that one of the in-kernel drivers has recently (kernel 3.3) had Cedar Trail support added.
However, this module appears to not be built, even in kernel 3.3; this is where I'd recommend building your own kernel (read the HOWTOs, it will help)
Here's the Kconfig file from Linux 3.3.2
Looks like you should enable these:

Code: Select all

CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL
CONFIG_DRM
CONFIG_DRM_GMA500
CONFIG_DRM_GMA3600
Thinkpad X100e/Debian Squeeze (All reposiories enabled)/Linux 3.4.11:
1GB RAM/1.6GHz Neo X2/ATI HD 3200/RTL8191SEVA2 wlan0, RTL8169 eth0

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#11 Post by jacobh »

Ibidem wrote: If you read the references, you would see that one of the in-kernel drivers has recently (kernel 3.3) had Cedar Trail support added.
However, this module appears to not be built, even in kernel 3.3; this is where I'd recommend building your own kernel (read the HOWTOs, it will help)
Ah, sorry, I’d missed that there were modules in the 3.3 kernel which supported the hardware but they hadn’t been built by default. I think it’s because they are flagged as “experimental”.

Anyway, rebuilding the 3.3 kernel currently in experimental with those modules added worked straight away and I can now run X at full resolution (what a difference it makes!). Rather annoying it took four goes to get the kernel built. The first was because the Installation Guide’s recommended build instruction fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image fails because --revision must start with a number. The next two failed when other people turned off the power and the battery died mid-build :shock:.

Thank you all, very much, for your help.

Ibidem
Posts: 160
Joined: 2010-12-24 18:28

Re: Atom N2600 / Cedar Trail graphics problems and workaroun

#12 Post by Ibidem »

jacobh wrote:
Ibidem wrote: If you read the references, you would see that one of the in-kernel drivers has recently (kernel 3.3) had Cedar Trail support added.
However, this module appears to not be built, even in kernel 3.3; this is where I'd recommend building your own kernel (read the HOWTOs, it will help)
Anyway, rebuilding the 3.3 kernel currently in experimental with those modules added worked straight away and I can now run X at full resolution (what a difference it makes!). Rather annoying it took four goes to get the kernel built. The first was because the Installation Guide’s recommended build instruction fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image fails because --revision must start with a number. The next two failed when other people turned off the power and the battery died mid-build :shock:.

Thank you all, very much, for your help.
Glad it now works.
FYI, the current standard practice is to use

Code: Select all

make; make deb-pkg
The upstream kernel.org version supports building kernel packages natively. This approach is pretty much guaranteed to work if the kernel compiles.
Thinkpad X100e/Debian Squeeze (All reposiories enabled)/Linux 3.4.11:
1GB RAM/1.6GHz Neo X2/ATI HD 3200/RTL8191SEVA2 wlan0, RTL8169 eth0

turnip
Posts: 3
Joined: 2012-04-24 06:36

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#13 Post by turnip »

Finally! I just bought a netbook 2 days ago. Atom 2600 processor. Linux 11.10 is already installed (kernel 3.0).

It seems like you guys have solved the 800x600 resolution problem. ive been searching for a cure since yesterday.

However, im a complete newbie to the linux world. i want my netbook to have linux only.
I cannot fully follow the solution to the problem.

Kindly, make a step by step instructions for youngsters like us. :D

Thanks in advance!

turnip
Posts: 3
Joined: 2012-04-24 06:36

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#14 Post by turnip »

by the way, i happen to use Ubuntu 11.10.

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#15 Post by jacobh »

I’ve had a couple of requests for instructions as to how I got this to work. They are below. Please understand that I am not a kernel hacker and it has been at least 5 years since I last rolled my own kernel. I therefore took an ultra-conservative attitude (i.e. using the Debian kernel sources not the upstream ones; rebuilding the entire kernel and not just the drivers required for my machine &c.) which was probably excessive. Please also understand that I did this by following other how-to guides, in particular the Installer Guide. According to Ibidem this is no longer the Right Way to do it, so corrections are welcome. The requirements will also change as new kernels filter down from upstream.

I am not sure how to get this to work for Ubuntu; perhaps someone can help advise.

The first stage is to add the experimental repository to apt. Edit (as root) /etc/apt/soures.list to add:

Code: Select all

deb http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ experimental main non-free contrib
deb-src http://ftp.uk.debian.org/debian/ experimental main non-free contrib
You then want to set up some pinning preferences so your entire system doesn’t get updated to experimental. If /etc/apt/preferences does not exist, create it with something like:

Code: Select all

Package: *
Pin: release a=testing
Pin-Priority: 650

Package: *
Pin: release a=experimental
Pin-Priority: 600
NB. If you are currently using stable rather than testing are your main repository, change “testing” to “stable”. If /etc/apt/preferences already exists then simple add a new section for experimental, making sure it has a lower pin-priority than your main repository.

Then update aptitude:

Code: Select all

aptitude update
and check that the pinning works by running

Code: Select all

aptitude upgrade
If aptitude wants to update every package on your system you know something has gone wrong with the pinning!

Then install the packages required to build the kernel, and the kernel source (I think this is the right list):

Code: Select all

aptitude install fakeroot kernel-package qt4-dev-tools qt4-qmake linux-source-3.3 
Change to the directory where the kernel source is located and unpack it:

Code: Select all

cd /usr/src
tar xjf  /usr/src/linux-source-3.3.tar.bz2

Enter the source directory:

Code: Select all

cd linux-source-3.3
I then configured the kernel to add the drivers with xconfig which, again, may no longer be a recommended way. Run:

Code: Select all

make xconfig
And, hopefully, the qconfig window will open (it’s a GUI application). Go to Edit -> Search or hit Ctrl + F and search for GMA3600 and click the check tick-box next to it. Then search for GMA600 and click that tick-box too. (You probably don’t need this driver but I built it too, in any case).

Alternatively, if you want to do it by hand, scroll about two-thirds down in the left hand column to Direct Rendering Manager (under Device Drivers -> Graphics support) and click on it. In the top window on the right-hand-side, click on the check-box next to Intel GMA5/600 KMS Framebuffer. Two options should then appear underneath: Intel GMA600 support (Experimental) and Intel GMA3600/3650 support (Experimental). Tick the tick-boxes next to them.

[There is probably a nice way I can reduce this stage to a one-line command, but I am not sure what it is.]

Save and exit the programme.

We then have to work around Debian bug #663474. Edit /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/targets/common.mk to change this line (line 67 in my version) from:

Code: Select all

LGUEST_SUBDIR = $(word 1,$(wildcard Documentation/lguest Documentation/virtual/lguest))
to

Code: Select all

LGUEST_SUBDIR = $(word 1,$(wildcard Documentation/lguest Documentation/virtual/lguest tools/lguest))
. We could probably also do this with a soft link, but this worked for me.

We are now ready to build the kernel. Return to the /usr/src/linux-source-3.3 directory and run

Code: Select all

make-kpkg clean
fakeroot make-kpkg --initrd --revision=3.3.custom kernel_image
On a N2600 it will take hours to build the kernel. I recommend leaving the machine (plugged in, not on battery!) overnight to build it.

If the build is successful, we are left with a .deb file for the new kernel in the /usr/src/linux-source-3.3 directory. Install it with:

Code: Select all

cd /usr/src
dpkg -i linux-image-3.3.2_3.3.custom_i386.deb
If you have created an xorg.conf file it may make sense to move it:

Code: Select all

mv /etc/X11/xorg.conf /etc/X11/xorg.conf.bak
Then reboot. Hopefully the new kernel will have been added to the top of the grub menu. Once it boots up it automagically detects the graphics card and should set the resolution correctly.

If the machine fails to boot on the new kernel, turn it off then on again, select an older kernel from the grub menu and run:

Code: Select all

dpkg -r linux-image-3.3.2 
to remove the custom one.

sokolov
Posts: 2
Joined: 2012-04-23 18:20

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#16 Post by sokolov »

How exactly did you build the new kernel and which version?

Does the screen still work when it wakes up from sleep/standby?

And do WiFi and LAN work?

Over at
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1953734&page=2
two users report these problems.

turnip
Posts: 3
Joined: 2012-04-24 06:36

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#17 Post by turnip »

Thanks for the immediate reply. Ill try it as soon as i can. Will post my progress for the benefit of humankind.

Thanks again!

jacobh
Posts: 29
Joined: 2011-03-29 23:44
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#18 Post by jacobh »

sokolov wrote:How exactly did you build the new kernel and which version?
I built the current version of the kernel in experimental (3.3.2-1~experimental.1); the method is in the previous post.
sokolov wrote:Does the screen still work when it wakes up from sleep/standby?
I’m afraid I don’t use sleep or standby.
sokolov wrote:And do WiFi and LAN work?
Yes, but then my machine (an Asus Eee) has an Atheros wireless card which is one of the more painless ones to get working on Linux.

sokolov
Posts: 2
Joined: 2012-04-23 18:20

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#19 Post by sokolov »

Thank you, maybe I'll give it a try later on. I've tried Ubuntu 12.04 Beta 2, then with Kernel 3.3.3 - and now I've decided to give Meego 1.2 a chance. If that doesn't do it either I'll come back to compiling a 3.3.2 kernel. :-)

dealcorn
Posts: 13
Joined: 2010-12-30 09:30

Re: Atom N2600/CedarTrail graphics problems & workarounds?[S

#20 Post by dealcorn »

How do I clear the following error obtained when following the procedure?

Code: Select all

root@n2800:/usr/src/linux-source-3.3# make xconfig
  HOSTCC  scripts/basic/fixdep
  CHECK   qt
* Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake. Trying to use QT3
*
* Unable to find any QT installation. Please make sure that
* the QT4 or QT3 development package is correctly installed and
* either qmake can be found or install pkg-config or set
* the QTDIR environment variable to the correct location.
*
  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/conf.o
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.c
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.lex.c
  SHIPPED scripts/kconfig/zconf.hash.c
  HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/zconf.tab.o
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `scripts/kconfig/.tmp_qtcheck', needed by `scripts/kconfig/qconf.o'.  Stop.
make: *** [xconfig] Error 2
Both qt4-dev-tools qt4-qmake were properly installed in a prior step.

Two observations may help to those who wish to follow. First, stable has unresolved dependencies under this approach. The testing distribution looks good so far. Second, the suggested tar command dropped a " -" parameter after the word tar.

Edit: I created a soft link using:

Code: Select all

ln -s /var/lib/dpkg/alternatives/qmake
which permited completion of the procedure sucessfully. The remaining issue involves creation of xorg.conf.

Post Reply