lzm modules won't all convert?

[Burninbush]

I dunno whether this is a bug or not -- playing with Porteus v1.0 x86_64.

I found some modules at Hool De Nord's 64-bit repo that I'd like to have, dl'ed 4 of them, all with .lzm extensions. The Porteus uses .xzm extensions, and won't load the .lzm files directly? Tried renaming them to .xzm, but that didn't work. It did allow me to extract them to a folder, after which I ran dir2xzm on the folders to make legitimate [???] Port64 modules.

Two of them worked, but two didn't, and the system is not giving me a clue what might be wrong with them. In particular, an Audacity module and a jre module won't convert this way. What is the official plan for reusing these older modules?

[Ahau]

you can convert lzm's to xzm's by double clicking on them, then clicking 'yes' to convert. I've only done a few so far myself, and haven't run into any problems. Did these packages work for you in V09?

Also, have you tried running them as root?

[fanthom]

@Ahau
"you can convert lzm's to xzm's by double clicking on them"
i think it's not implemented in 64bits yet.

@Burninbush
dir2xzm should do the job, just in case try lzm2xzm cli conversion tool.
BETA should have this feature implemented in 'activation' script.

[Ahau]

I guess I've spent too much time in 32-bit SVN this week

[beny]

yes you think well....

[Ahau]

bb--

have you tried moving these modules into /porteus/modules and rebooting, rather than double clicking to activate the modules in a running system? I'm having some weird issues with a module that I'm trying to build, and it will run properly if it's injected at startup, but not if it's activated later.

[Burninbush]

@Burninbush
dir2xzm should do the job, just in case try lzm2xzm cli conversion tool.
BETA should have this feature implemented in 'activation' script. >fanthom

++++++++++++++

Just to report back on this issue -- lzm2xzm conversion was successful for most modules I tried. Don't have a clue why extracting to a directory [method I was trying] didn't work. I was never able to get samba or wine to successfully convert, so I have parked the 64-bit porteus until I can get better versions of those two.

In general, 64-bits is a large disappointment to me -- seems generally much slower than the same in 32-bit versions. I may someday find an app that makes it seem worthwhile.

And a porteus-specific complaint -- xzm may be slightly faster at extracting than lzm, but probably not enough to ever recover the time spent converting modules and installing new OS'es.

I do have a new mobo now which at last makes it seem practical to run kde4 -- got an Athlon II X4 model 640 cpu, much faster than the older xp2400 board it replaced. It remains to be seen that I'll ever come to like kde4, though. But module conversions go much faster with 4 cpu's running in parallel.

[fanthom]

@burninbush
"lzm2xzm conversion was successful for most modules I tried. Don't have a clue why extracting to a directory [method I was trying] didn't work."
maybe you have made the same mistake as Ahau and did it on FAT/NTFS partition?:
http://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php? ... 338&p=1727
lzm2xzm uses /tmp dir for conversion so package content is always unpacked to posix compatible fs (AUFS or any linuxfs when persistent changes are used) and symlinks are not broken.

"I was never able to get samba or wine to successfully convert,"
are they a 64bit versions? please avoid 32bits where possible. if they really are 64bit the please upload lzm somewhere and i'll check what's wrong with them.

"In general, 64-bits is a large disappointment to me"
are you referring to KDE-4, LXDE or whole system? except for KDE-4 i find everything faster in 64bits env....

"And a porteus-specific complaint -- xzm may be slightly faster at extracting than lzm, but probably not enough to ever recover the time spent converting modules and installing new OS'es."
xz compression for squashfs is present in upcoming kernel versions. I doubt that LZMA will ever be officially supported.
sorry but i'm not going back to LZMA.

Cheers

[Burninbush]

"I was never able to get samba or wine to successfully convert,"
are they a 64bit versions? please avoid 32bits where possible. if they really are 64bit the please upload lzm somewhere and i'll check what's wrong with them.

"In general, 64-bits is a large disappointment to me"
are you referring to KDE-4, LXDE or whole system? except for KDE-4 i find everything faster in 64bits env.... >fanthom, re my comments

++++++++++++++++++++

Ah .. to be clear, I wasn't speaking of Porteus64 specifically, rather 64-bit linux in general. If you have a computer with Nvidia video, please try glxgears on porteus32 and then on porteus64 -- on both my desktops**, the 32bit version is ~2x faster on the same computer. Can that much speed loss be due to kde4? If it is, then I dunno why anybody would go there; this is not progress.

The samba and wine .lzm modules have x86_64 in the name, and were working on the v09 version of Porteus/remix. I converted them on a reiserfs filesystem.

** desktop1 is an amd64-3000 w/512mb and a GF6200 vid card
** desktop2 is an Athlon II X4 w/4gb and onboard GF8200 video
** I have frugal installs of porteus32 and 64 on both machines.
** downloaded nvidia module vs. compiled here from NV source work exactly the same

[fanthom]

@burninbush
"If you have a computer with Nvidia video, please try glxgears on porteus32 and then on porteus64 -- on both my desktops**, the 32bit version is ~2x faster on the same computer."
hmmm... unfortunately i dont. as you probably know, glxgears is not a benchmark - did you try to compare FPS in any opengl game? Ahau, beny, others - will you be able to confirm this as well?
Probably i wont be able to do much about it, just for my curiosity

"The samba and wine .lzm modules have x86_64 in the name, and were working on the v09 version of Porteus/remix. I converted them on a reiserfs filesystem."
ok so FAT option does not apply here. still - wont be able to check them until you provide a download link.

Regards

[Burninbush]

Following my glxgears complaints ... apparently the slowness I've seen is primarily due to kde4, and it's just a coincidence that all the modern 64-bit distros run kde4. Ran a survey, here are some numbers from my faster box ...

Port64, kde4 = 1519 fps
Port64, lxde = 2320 fps (53% faster)

Nimblex2010, kde4, 32bit = 1601 fps

Port32, kde? = 2336 fps
Port32, lxde = 2328 fps

Slax612, kde3 = 2359 fps
Slax612, fluxbox = 2350 fps

Kanotix2010, kde3 = 2399 fps

The numbers on the older desktop are wider spread:

Port64, kde4, 690 fps
Port64, lxde, 1232 fps (78% faster)
Port32, kde?, 1300 fps (88% faster)

[fanthom]

"apparently the slowness I've seen is primarily due to kde4"
thanks for this detailed benchmark.
did you have "composite effects" enabled or disabled during the test?

[Burninbush]

did you have "composite effects" enabled or disabled during the test? >fanthom

+++++++++++++++

Ahhh ... don't know. Where is that set? I just use default in nvidia-settings, whatever that is.

[beny]

hi all with porteus64 lzm composite on:
26268 frames in 5.0 seconds = 5253.513 FPS
what is the mean of this string

[fanthom]

@Burninbush
you can enable/disable it through "KDE System Settings" -> "Desktop effects" (or something like that). please try to enable/disable it and compare the results.

@beny
it means that your card is pretty good but not the best
quite old ATI 2600xt gives me 9000 FPS with Catalyst driver.
---------------------------------------------------------------
it's too much OFF TOP so let's continue in this thread:
http://forum.porteus.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=336