Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#1 by komoornik » 24 Jul 2011, 14:29
Broadcom wifi card
Clean boot of 32 bit Porteus without any modifications - wicd can't find any networks
Clean boot of 64 bit version - wicd finds and connects to networks
Question: Why the 32 bit version is worse?
komoornik
- fanthom
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 5667
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 02:42
- Distribution: Porteus Kiosk
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#2 by fanthom » 24 Jul 2011, 22:06
i have added updated version to 32bit fixes:
http://ponce.cc/porteus/i486/testing/1. ... .0-fix.xzm
copy it to your /porteus/modules folder and reboot system - should be ok then

fanthom
komoornik
Hamza
komoornik
Hamza
- fanthom
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 5667
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 02:42
- Distribution: Porteus Kiosk
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#7 by fanthom » 25 Jul 2011, 22:22
rebooting should do the job but you can load driver manually as advised by Hamza. open terminal and type 'modprobe wl' then run 'tail -n50 /var/log/dmesg' and past the output here. to be sure that wl driver was loaded correctly run 'lsmod | grep wl' and show us the result.
fanthom
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#8 by komoornik » 31 Jul 2011, 17:07
Code: Select all
bash-4.1# tail -n50 /var/log/dmesg
[ 12.162741] [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
[ 12.177154] brcm80211 0000:02:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 17 (level, low) -> IRQ 17
[ 12.177170] brcm80211 0000:02:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 12.211405] brcm80211: fail to load firmware brcm/bcm43xx-0.fw
[ 12.211414] brcm80211: Failed to find firmware usually in /lib/firmware/brcm
[ 12.211463] brcm80211 0000:02:00.0: PCI INT A disabled
[ 12.211494] brcm80211: wl_pci_probe: wl_attach failed!
[ 12.241420] lib80211: common routines for IEEE802.11 drivers
[ 12.241428] lib80211_crypt: registered algorithm 'NULL'
[ 12.393713] i915 0000:00:02.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 16 (level, low) -> IRQ 16
[ 12.393724] i915 0000:00:02.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 12.444240] mtrr: type mismatch for b0000000,10000000 old: write-back new: write-combining
[ 12.444249] [drm] MTRR allocation failed. Graphics performance may suffer.
[ 12.445366] i915 0000:00:02.0: irq 44 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 12.445378] [drm] Supports vblank timestamp caching Rev 1 (10.10.2010).
[ 12.445384] [drm] Driver supports precise vblank timestamp query.
[ 12.452877] [drm:intel_dsm_platform_mux_info] *ERROR* MUX INFO call failed
[ 12.453032] [drm:intel_dsm_platform_mux_info] *ERROR* MUX INFO call failed
[ 12.526719] wl: module license 'unspecified' taints kernel.
[ 12.526726] Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint
[ 12.534743] vgaarb: device changed decodes: PCI:0000:00:02.0,olddecodes=io+mem,decodes=none:owns=io+mem
[ 12.534753] vgaarb: transferring owner from PCI:0000:00:02.0 to PCI:0000:04:00.0
[ 12.535226] [drm] initialized overlay support
[ 12.539295] wl 0000:02:00.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 17 (level, low) -> IRQ 17
[ 12.539314] wl 0000:02:00.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 12.575396] lib80211_crypt: registered algorithm 'TKIP'
[ 12.575730] eth0: Broadcom BCM4727 802.11 Hybrid Wireless Controller 5.100.82.38
[ 12.602170] udev[2029]: renamed network interface eth0 to eth2
[ 12.793557] checking generic (b0000000 7f0000) vs hw (b0000000 10000000)
[ 12.793567] fb: conflicting fb hw usage inteldrmfb vs VESA VGA - removing generic driver
[ 12.793633] Console: switching to colour dummy device 80x25
[ 12.796146] fbcon: inteldrmfb (fb0) is primary device
[ 12.800109] Console: switching to colour frame buffer device 170x48
[ 12.847224] fb0: inteldrmfb frame buffer device
[ 12.847231] drm: registered panic notifier
[ 12.847367] [Firmware Bug]: ACPI(GFX0) defines _DOD but not _DOS
[ 12.848850] input: Video Bus as /devices/LNXSYSTM:00/device:00/PNP0A08:00/device:26/LNXVIDEO:00/input/input10
[ 12.849280] ACPI: Video Device [GFX0] (multi-head: yes rom: yes post: no)
[ 12.859923] ACPI Warning: _BQC returned an invalid level (20110112/video-473)
[ 12.869966] acpi device:2c: registered as cooling_device4
[ 12.871473] input: Video Bus as /devices/LNXSYSTM:00/device:00/PNP0A08:00/LNXVIDEO:01/input/input11
[ 12.871879] ACPI: Video Device [VGA] (multi-head: yes rom: no post: no)
[ 12.872991] [drm] Initialized i915 1.6.0 20080730 for 0000:00:02.0 on minor 0
[ 12.873150] HDA Intel 0000:00:1b.0: PCI INT A -> GSI 22 (level, low) -> IRQ 22
[ 12.873282] HDA Intel 0000:00:1b.0: irq 45 for MSI/MSI-X
[ 12.873336] HDA Intel 0000:00:1b.0: setting latency timer to 64
[ 12.924243] hda_codec: ALC269VB: BIOS auto-probing.
[ 12.927463] input: HDA Intel Mic as /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1b.0/sound/card0/input12
[ 12.927762] input: HDA Intel Headphone as /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1b.0/sound/card0/input13
[ 14.024777] FAT: utf8 is not a recommended IO charset for FAT filesystems, filesystem will be case sensitive!
bash-4.1# lsmod | grep wl
wl 2538388 0
lib80211 2076 2 lib80211_crypt_tkip,wl
komoornik
- fanthom
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 5667
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 02:42
- Distribution: Porteus Kiosk
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#9 by fanthom » 01 Aug 2011, 11:55
for some reason your wifi device gets named as eth0 and not wlan0:
Code: Select all
[ 12.575730] eth0: Broadcom BCM4727 802.11 Hybrid Wireless Controller 5.100.82.38
you can use 'pns-tool' to set your network with eth0 or try to fight with wicd.
in second case pls add 'brcm80211' 'b43' and 'b43legacy' drivers to /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist.conf to make sure that they are not loaded during boot.
let me know if any of my advices worked for you.
fanthom
- francois
- Contributor
- Posts: 6514
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
- Distribution: xfce plank porteus nemesis
- Location: Le printemps, le printemps, le printemps... ... l'hiver s'essoufle.
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#10 by francois » 01 Aug 2011, 20:54
From an old thread for remix (googling broadcom francois.e remix keywords). I have a broadcom 4328 on my hp pavilion 2713ca:
http://slax.speedymirror.com/forum.php? ... ntID=70793
Citation:
"Good, Wifi is finally working for me. I knew that linux sta for bcm was on the distribution. I finally understood that to use the bcm43xx (for me 4328), all I had to do was to blaclist ssb and b43, as proposed in:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Broadcom_BCM43XX"
Hoping that this helps.

francois
- brokenman
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 03:50
- Distribution: Porteus v4 all desktops
- Location: Brazil
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#11 by brokenman » 02 Aug 2011, 07:34
You may want to specify which MAC gets which device name using udev and a rule such as:
KERNEL=="eth*", SYSFS{address}=="00:13:32:fo:ob:ar", NAME="eth0"
Wear your underpants on the outside and put on a cape.
brokenman
komoornik
- fanthom
- Moderator Team
- Posts: 5667
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 02:42
- Distribution: Porteus Kiosk
- Location: Poland
- Contact:
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#13 by fanthom » 03 Aug 2011, 08:47

i can see 2 possibilities:
1) if you are saving changes then 'wlan0' name could be linked with previous driver - try 'Always Fresh' mode.
2) i have seen strange scenario when 'modesetting' DDX driver was taking priority over 'nouveau' when both were placed in 002-xorg module. once nouveau was moved to 003 or later it was loaded first by Xorg. i can't explain why it was like that.
in your case i would try to remaster 000-kernel.xzm and replace faulty wl.ko driver with good one from the fix.
if you have some free time you could try this experiment.
fanthom
- francois
- Contributor
- Posts: 6514
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
- Distribution: xfce plank porteus nemesis
- Location: Le printemps, le printemps, le printemps... ... l'hiver s'essoufle.
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#14 by francois » 03 Aug 2011, 15:08

However, it seems I have some problems too

http://porteus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=758
francois
- francois
- Contributor
- Posts: 6514
- Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
- Distribution: xfce plank porteus nemesis
- Location: Le printemps, le printemps, le printemps... ... l'hiver s'essoufle.
Re: Porteus 32 bit is worse then 64 bit?
Post#15 by francois » 21 Aug 2011, 13:12
http://forum.porteus.org/faq.php?sid=4a ... 312a39c3f0
francois