Ubuntu Kernel-Update 13.04 - How to?

GoogleGroups
1

I am currently running Ubuntu 13.04 on BBB from my SD-card. The kernel version shows:

Linux 3.8.13-bone20 #1 SMP Wed May 29 06:14:59 UTC 2013

When I look on the available sources for Raring then I see an already available version 28. When I follow the instruction then I did:

export DIST=raring 
export ARCH=armhf
export BOARD=omap-psp

wget [http://rcn-ee.net/deb/${DIST}-${ARCH}/LATEST-${BOARD}](http://rcn-ee.net/deb/$%7BDIST%7D-$%7BARCH%7D/LATEST-$%7BBOARD%7D)
wget $(cat ./LATEST-${BOARD} | grep STABLE | awk '{print $3}')
/bin/bash install-me.sh

No failure, no warnings. I reboot but the version remains the same. I guess that’s due to an unchanged kernel on the SD-card.

  1. Anything to do further, so the kernel will be used as well on the SD-card?

If I change DIST to DIST=saucy (cause I wanna try an update to Ubuntu 13.10), then I get with the install-scripts errors like:

Setting up linux-image-3.8.13-bone28 (1.0saucy) …

update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-3.8.13-bone28

2

Your drive is clearly "out of space" so cleanup some of the older
kernel files first from "/boot/uboot" (*bak files, etc).

Also run "df -h" that way we can see what size the boot partition is
in the first place..

Regards,

3

I had a similar problem, https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beagleboard/zYjkuMcDRgM/ZD1yfordKTsJ

See if the kernel image was copied to your boot drive.

What files are in:
ls /boot

Also check zImage, the file actually used to boot the system
ls -la /boot

I found on my system that zImage was a symlink instead of a file and this messed up the installation process.

A simple fix is to remove the zImage symlink and then recreate it pointing to the correct image… Note: double check that you created it properly! If zImage does not exist or points to a file which does not exist, that sd card will be unusable for booting the system until you fix it!

4

I followed your advice and the result remains the same. I have attached the results resp. commands.

What I did:

  1. Check as you mentioned.
  2. Reboot
  3. Rerun the installation
  4. Error reoccurs.

I guess it has to do with the SD-card, but I am not really sure in which way…

Do you see anything helpful for fixing the problem?

Ubuntu1304_upgrade.zip (3.11 KB)

5

Yeap "ubuntu-armhf", that's not my image, so no support from me... So
follow garyamort's advice...

Regards,

6



Where is your 3.8 stuff for the white . with device tree support for digikey can cape??? I just built a native box no more virtual so maybe I can get this right. My goal is first install binaries if you have them and then see if I can build them myself.



Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

|

7

Same image as on the BBB site. Use the SD card boot version.

Gerald

8

Also check zImage, the file actually used to boot the system
ls -la /boot

…

A simple fix is to remove the zImage symlink and then recreate it pointing to the correct image…

Thx, this fixed the issue. At least now I can launch and get

Linux 3.8.13-bone28 #1 SMP Fri Sep 13 03:12:24 UTC 2013

But your solution gives me more headache. First of all, I guess I can delete the x20-files. Right?
Next, what are the files in uboot good for? (Cause there is as well zImage, but 0byte large).
And last, can I find a description how this whole stuff should work?

No, one more question (I hope you could bear it :wink: ): Since I’m now running on the new system ==> How to flash it into eMMC?

9

Yeap “ubuntu-armhf”, that’s not my image, so no support from me… So
follow garyamort’s advice…

Thx, that fixed the issue. But your response made it clear, that there are obviously different ubuntu-images around. Looking on

http://elinux.org/BeagleBoardUbuntu#Script_File

I retrieve it from there and I thought that

http://elinux.org/BeagleBoardUbuntu#eMMC:_BeagleBone_Black

is somehow the same base. Somehow not, cause you mention ‘not my image’. Would you mind to clarify between what is your (?) image and what is ubuntu-armhf-image ? Or how are they related to each other and is there one more to take into consideration? Sorry, but I don’t get it from the webpage above and would really like to understand the differences…

leo

10

Yeap "ubuntu-armhf", that's not my image, so no support from me... So
follow garyamort's advice...

Thx, that fixed the issue. But your response made it clear, that there are
obviously different ubuntu-images around. Looking on

BeagleBoardUbuntu - eLinux.org

I retrieve it from there and I thought that

BeagleBoardUbuntu - eLinux.org

is somehow the same base.

It's the same "ubuntu" base packages, but it's all in the partition layout/etc..

Somehow not, cause you mention 'not my image'.
Would you mind to clarify between what is your (?) image and what is
ubuntu-armhf-image ?

It's real simple.. ^ that's not my image. The author of that image
decided he wanted to go a different route for bootloader, uEnv.txt,
kernel location, partition layout, etc.. Which create issues with my
install-me.sh script.

Or how are they related to each other and is there one
more to take into consideration? Sorry, but I don't get it from the webpage
above and would really like to understand the differences...

It basically comes down to... Your free to install whatever you want.
The easy "install-me.sh" script is a feature of the images i host on
rcn-ee.net, for my customers to use that I've been using for a good
3-4 years. If you use someone else's root file-system and it doesn't
work, well, it's not a bug in my eyes...

Regards,

11

For those interested, i just pushed my "template" here:
https://github.com/rcn-ee/farm/blob/master/install-me-template.sh

I'll leave it up to the community to figure out how to correctly
detect & install the deb on that image without running out of space..

Regards,

12

Thx for clarification. To sum it up in my words: there is an ubuntu-armhf version and your version, which is summarized on your wiki. Your update scripts works flawless with your installation and do not work with the armhf version (cause the zImage is somehow linked wrong). There is no big difference between yours and the armhf version, but there are some. But the kernel update can be done anyway with your scripts (except the problems I was faced), right? I mean, the kernel is finally updated…

I hope I get the differences somehow right and don’t mix them up tooo much.

Last question: Do you know, if your package is smaller in size compared to the armhf? Just for curiosity.

Anyway thx for your efforts.

leo

13

Thx for clarification. To sum it up in my words: there is an ubuntu-armhf
version and your version, which is summarized on your wiki. Your update
scripts works flawless with your installation and do not work with the armhf
version (cause the zImage is somehow linked wrong). There is no big
difference between yours and the armhf version, but there are some. But the
kernel update can be done anyway with your scripts (except the problems I
was faced), right? I mean, the kernel is finally updated...

I hope I get the differences somehow right and don't mix them up tooo much.

Last question: Do you know, if your package is smaller in size compared to
the armhf? Just for curiosity.

In one of my images, I got Debian Wheezy down to 64Mb in size, on
disk.. It's funny as the kernel/modules avg around 50Mb... :wink:

For the normal images, i've enabled a few apt.conf tweaks which have
saved easily saved 50-75Mb just from dpkg/apt cache alone..

Regards,

14



Leo if you like some fun try building this from scratch it works flawlessly (-:



Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android

|

15

For me using Robert’s bare rootfs build script the bare rootfs was right around 74M on the BBB. base rootfs for the same weighed in at around ~450M, and there seems to be a lot of “play” in between. adding / removing packages etc, as you see fit.

16

For images already installed to media (2GB eMMC), these two apt.conf
changes (02nocache & 02compress-indexes) can help you recover some space..

Just make sure to run "sudo apt-get update ; sudo apt-get clean" first..

https://github.com/RobertCNelson/omap-image-builder/blob/master/scripts/chroot.sh#L174

Sure, "sudo apt-get install xyz" will take a few more clock cycles, but if
space is more important..

Regards,

17

Also check zImage, the file actually used to boot the system
ls -la /boot

…

A simple fix is to remove the zImage symlink and then recreate it pointing to the correct image…

Thx, this fixed the issue. At least now I can launch and get

Linux 3.8.13-bone28 #1 SMP Fri Sep 13 03:12:24 UTC 2013

But your solution gives me more headache. First of all, I guess I can delete the x20-files. Right?

Yes, definitely get rid of them.

Next, what are the files in uboot good for? (Cause there is as well zImage, but 0byte large).
And last, can I find a description how this whole stuff should work?

I don’t know. I mucked myself up royally using that Ubuntu-armhf image. Everything “works” now so I left that sd card alone and just use it.

I’ve got some extra micro-SD cards now AND a reasonable cross-platform build system[running Linux Mint 15] so a short term goal for me is to build/create an SD card from Robert Nelson’s scripts the “right” way so the layout isn’t this mess of half of his and half of something else.

A higher priority is to do some troubleshooting on my PHP library and push my changes for GPIO up to Github.

18

Well, I just meant that 74M in size is really impressive, at least to me. However, I also require many other things, which will very likely “bloat” my own rootfs to at least 1G or more. So long as it stays under ~1.7G when all is said and done, I will be perfectly happy.

19

As crazy as this sounds, I do have an itch, to see if we can't drop
that a little more too.. There has to be a few more redundant files,
i haven't yet looked at embeddian/grip did, but there must be a few
more tricks..

Regards,

20

Not crazy at all. Someone a while back was claiming that Angrstrom can be had at ~16M size. I’m a bit dubious, unless somehow they managed to color busybox as Angstrom . . .