Upgrade from 1.5.7 to 1.5.8 issues
-
@Chris-Whiteley well for bzImage that’s easy
file bzImagewill tell you the current version of bzImage.For init.xz its not as easy but not hard either. If we use md5sum utility we can get the fingerprint of init.xz file.
This is for 1.5.7
md5sum init.xz 913326f3317b577be3cb65a7bf332afb init.xzIf you have the chance, since something is different, can you test with the init.xz from 1.5.8? Its best to do all in one day if possible.
-
bzimage - 4.19.101
init.xz - 9133326 -
@george1421 just tested with the 1.5.8 init.xz and got the slowness again
-
@Chris-Whiteley said in Upgrade from 1.5.7 to 1.5.8 issues:
just tested with the 1.5.8 init.xz and got the slowness again
Ok so what the developers (or myself) need to do is pluck out partclone from the 1.5.8 inits and install it in the 1.5.7 inits. This will point exactly to partclone.
The issue with 1.5.8 (not a problem just many things change) is that the system used to create the virtual hard drive (init.xz) was upgraded, this also upgraded a number of support modules inside the init.xz. So on the surface we don’t know if the latest version of gzip is doing this or partclone. At least in my head.
-
@george1421 Thanks for the update! Let me know what you guys find and if I can be of anymore help.
-
@Chris-Whiteley For now you have a path using the 1.5.7 inits. I might have time later tonight to unpack and repack the inits to copy over partclone. Once that is done we’ll have you test with the 1.5.7 inits with the patched in 0.3.13 partclone. Testing that will tell us about the next steps.
Thank you for your help til now to give us a clear picture of where the problem isn’t.
-
@Chris-Whiteley @george1421 I really like George’s truth table as it’s the best way to figure out those kind of things. To have it always on top I updated George’s information and put it into a table in the initial post. Let’s try to keep it updated there.
-
@Chris-Whiteley @george1421 Just wanna keep this topic up on the screen…
-
@Chris-Whiteley @george1421 ping pong
-
@Sebastian-Roth Has this been hard to replicate? Or is it just that it has been hard to find time to do this? Thanks!
-
@Chris-Whiteley Good you are asking. I was still under the impression that we need more testing to fill the truth table I added to your initial post. So I haven’t been working on this lately. Sorry, should have been more clear in my last messages.
-
@Sebastian-Roth I thought we tested and then @george1421 was going to look at some of the behind the scenes things and then would get back to me? If I am wrong and I needed to do something else, please let me know!
-
@Sebastian-Roth I think I dropped the ball on this one. My company is considered essential so I’m still working through this mess.
I think where I was at was taking the partclone bits from 1.5.7 inits and to overwrite the partclone bits in the 1.5.8 inits. This will give us an idea if its 0.2.89 code or something else in teh 1.5.8 inits like zstd, gzip, something else.
-
@Chris-Whiteley @george1421 Thanks for the quick update. I just added two lines to the truth table. Chris, can you please test those two and report back? One of them you did a test on already but as this is crucial I may ask you to do it again as we get this going again.
-
@george1421 said:
I think where I was at was taking the partclone bits from 1.5.7 inits and to overwrite the partclone bits in the 1.5.8 inits.
Re-reading things I think we already have this part (1.5.8mod). But we seem to miss the reverse - put partclone 0.3.13 into the default 1.5.7 init - unless I have overlooked something in the thread. Not really sure why I put this in the truth table already but I can’t find a 1.5.7mod init anywhere in this topic. Do you?
-
@Sebastian-Roth Maybe that is where i/we were at. Taking 0.3.13 and putting it on the 1.5.7 inits. This is a bit more complicated then creating the 1.5.8mod since for the 1.5.8mod you just include the old version of partclone in the build.
I was also going to check to see if there has been any updates for partclone too. But things have been a bit crazy here.
-
@george1421 @Sebastian-Roth Thank you for all you do! I understand about being “essential”. Working from home right now.
-
@Sebastian-Roth It looks like 1 of those 1.5.8mod’s was already done in the middle of the current truth table.
-
@Chris-Whiteley said:
It looks like 1 of those 1.5.8mod’s was already done in the middle of the current truth table.
Yes, I mentioned earlier that you seem to have done this one already but I may ask you to re-do that one test as we pick this up again. Just wanna make sure we really get the tests consistent.
I will work on building a 1.5.7mod today.
-
@Chris-Whiteley It’s been hectic today and so I finally got to start the build just now. Will get back to you in the next hours.
Did you get to test the other two pairs listed in the truth table with speed marked as “???” yet?