[Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

cphayes0882 · 2011-11-14 11:21:10

Heh, yeah, flash can be a gamble, I got the flash block plugin just in case.

Machine_bacon, Im on flash 11.1 r102 right now, just updated. The newer flash is definitely better, smoother on my computer, but even with the newer flash version with, Debian's kernel it was still stuttering, and with the liquorix/Arch kernel it flies along like Im watching a DVD. I wont say its every computer, but on my computer (Pentium4 32bit, 1 gig ram) it seems much better, even better than just updating the flash version. I even reinstalled the system(wasnt related to this, I messed something up) and tested this out.

Wish I knew more about kernel's though, so I knew what exactly it was. Probably some simple switch that was used when it was compiled. Im going start a thread I think that asks ppl who compile vanilla kernels what tricks and tweaks they use to improve system performance. Im really interested, and dont wanna fly off topic on this thread tongue

Last edited by cphayes0882 (2011-11-14 11:22:20)

albertreg · 2011-11-22 13:46:07

thats a nice change but what is the exact use of change?

Last edited by albertreg (2011-11-24 19:47:47)

robkendrick · 2011-11-22 13:53:22

cphayes0882 wrote:

Wish I knew more about kernel's though, so I knew what exactly it was. Probably some simple switch that was used when it was compiled. Im going start a thread I think that asks ppl who compile vanilla kernels what tricks and tweaks they use to improve system performance. Im really interested, and dont wanna fly off topic on this thread

That's a great idea, cp! I'd be interested as well, since I'm looking at starting on the Linux From Scratch project next...

ej64 · 2011-11-22 15:17:59

Perhaps of high interest for owner of Sandy Bridge systems:
the latest 3.1.0-1.dmz.2-liquorix uses Matthew Garrett's patches to adress the PCIe ASPM power regressions.

On all Sandy Bridge systems these patches will make boot parameter "pcie_apsm=force" needless if not a waste of power savings (see below).

Unfortunatly since kernel 3.0 another power regression on i915* systems was introduced by defaultly disabling the low power modes due to bug reports (on 2.6.39 it was still enabled). But usually it's no problem to forcedly enable this power saving setting (grub boot parameter "i915.i915_enable_rc6=1").

On my system (Thinkpad X220) I need the i915 parameter and an additional "vga=844" otherwise it will not recognize the 1366*768 screen resolution. The system now idles at impressive 5.4 W.

The additional use of "pcie_apsm=force" makes things worse by 0.8 W so I recommend at least to check.

Liquorix = highly recommended cool

full story: Liquorix forum

*) chipset with HD2000/3000 graphics for i3/5/7-2000 series CPUs

Last edited by ej64 (2011-11-22 15:19:16)

patrickstein · 2012-01-09 04:37:29

I am trying to install this Kernal but it keeps saying:

E: Unable to locate package linux-image-2.6-liquorix-686
E: Couldn't find any package by regex 'linux-image-2.6-liquorix-686'

Stanie · 2012-01-09 23:53:42

patrickstein wrote:

I am trying to install this Kernal but it keeps saying:
E: Unable to locate package linux-image-2.6-liquorix-686
E: Couldn't find any package by regex 'linux-image-2.6-liquorix-686'

If you mean the liquorix kernel 2.6.36 from the beginning of this thread - that one is only in statler iso from 2/2011. For you to grab it add the old repo to your sources.list:

deb http://packages.crunchbanglinux.org/statler statler main ##CRUNCHBANG OLD

patrickstein · 2012-01-10 00:03:12

Stanie wrote:

If you mean the liquorix kernel 2.6.36 from the beginning of this thread - that one is only in statler iso from 2/2011. For you to grab it add the old repo to your sources.list:
deb http://packages.crunchbanglinux.org/statler statler main ##CRUNCHBANG OLD

I already have that in my Sources.list

Stanie · 2012-01-10 08:34:43

^ Hmm, so your sources.list for Crunchbang is now like this?

## CRUNCHBANG (Compatible with Debian Squeeze)
#deb http://packages.crunchbang.org/statler statler main
# deb-src http://packages.crunchbang.org/statler statler main
deb http://packages.crunchbanglinux.org/statler statler main #CRUNCHBANG OLD

Did you do sudo apt-get update or refresh it in synaptic before searching linux-image-2.6-liquorix-686 and linux-headers-2.6-liquorix-686? I just tried to install it and no probs.

sikantaza · 2012-03-22 15:18:50

why isn't the zen-kernel in the newest iso and the repo ? Is there some problem with that kernel ? Can I use that in the future ?

snowpine · 2012-03-22 15:31:01

sikantaza wrote:

why isn't the zen-kernel in the newest iso and the repo ? Is there some problem with that kernel ? Can I use that in the future ?

The kernel is designed for Debian Unstable/Sid, but #! is based on Stable/Squeeze.

Use at your own risk, it will probably be OK for you, but is no longer officially supported now that Squeeze is a stable release.

sikantaza · 2012-03-22 15:54:30

Thaks. I understand it. I saw that in my debian wheezy and that's good. But this testing (the wheezy) has some problem. This way I wont to try it in the crunchbang. But I think so I don't do it. I'll use clean crunchbang or squeezy lxde. Thanks your help.

Vansgo · 2012-03-22 21:33:48

You can use the Liquorix repo for a whole bunch of options:

## Liquorix Kernel by damentz http://www.liquorix.net/ .
# Secure Apt: apt-get install '^liquorix-([^-]+-)?keyring.?'
# Latest "stable" kernel
deb http://liquorix.net/debian/ sid main
# RC/Beta kernels
#deb http://liquorix.net/debian/ sid main future

sikantaza · 2012-03-23 10:37:40

Ok. Probably I'll use the Latest "stable" one. But wich one is better for that ? Is the stable #! (2.6.32) iso or the newer backprots iso ?
I did that (deb http://liquorix.net/debian sid main & the keyring) on wheezy (with lxde, and with gnome, on separated particions) . That's with gnome very slow on my laptop. The other one with lxde was without shut down and restart. Just logout. Somebody said to me that the liquorix kernel doesn't work on squeezy. Just on wheezy. It's my reason for that question about the #! iso. Sorry, my english knowledge is still weak. I hope you can understand me. Thanks.

Last edited by sikantaza (2012-03-23 10:42:27)

pvsage · 2012-03-23 14:54:53

If you're using older hardware (casually waves hand) the Stable kernel should be fine. If you're using newer hardware (casually waves hand) you want the backports kernel.

sikantaza · 2012-03-23 17:04:52

Thanks, I understand it. But there is another question: Can I use the "stable" kernel from the (deb http://liquorix.net/debian sid main ) repo on Stable Crunchbang ? Is it possible, or just the backports kernel ? It's the main problem to me.

pvsage · 2012-03-23 18:09:40

You can install the Liquorix kernel (note that the Liquorix repo is Sid, not Stable) and see how it goes. If any additional packages are installed, make a note of them. If it works fine with your hardware, great; if it doesn't, you can always boot with another installed kernel and purge the Liquorix kernel. Generally, since the Liquorix repo tracks Sid, we advise caution unless the rest of your system also tracks Sid.

sikantaza · 2012-03-24 16:03:03

I think so it's looking difficult for me. I'm beginner, and maybe I'll stay on stable way. That's better to me, and simple. Many risk. Thanks the answers.

Last edited by sikantaza (2012-03-24 16:07:12)

Ole · 2012-05-03 12:25:47

Running 3.3.0-4.dmz.1-liquorix-amd64 on Waldorf. Works well.

Jabroneous · 2012-05-14 20:58:14

Ole wrote:

Running 3.3.0-4.dmz.1-liquorix-amd64 on Waldorf. Works well.

On that note, since Wheezy is using 3.2, I wonder if the 3.2 Liquorix kernel will be included in Waldorf's repositories?

Yes, I wonder...

cool

Zilvarael · 2012-09-29 17:10:49

Awebb wrote:

So liquorix is some sort of prebuild zen kernel? On the one hand, I find the lack of documentation on the liquorix site disturbing, on the other hand: When using a patched kernel, you should make sure you know how to read configs.
rstrcogburn wrote:
@sectionsix (@pvsage, I always say that cuz your avatar looks like the dude on Ghost in the Shell)
It's the lawyer of Dethklok :-D

Although Section 6 is a legit section in the GITS story line so maybe there is a slight connection there.

pvsage · 2012-09-29 18:27:03

^ Digging up an old off-topic post for...? Besides, different avatar now.

DapperMe17 · 2012-11-06 04:17:33

Is the liquorix kernel issued under the same type of license as the regular linux kernel?

Thanks

el_koraco · 2012-11-06 08:50:10

DapperMe17 wrote:

Is the liquorix kernel issued under the same type of license as the regular linux kernel?
Thanks

You can only release it under the same license. That's what the GPL is all about.

pvsage · 2012-11-06 15:22:14

...and that's the primary difference between the GPL and the WTFPL (which is applied to, for example, cb-welcome). wink

dura · 2012-11-06 15:51:30

Since I heard about liqourix a while back I've been quite interested in trying it. Other than the obvious benefits created through optimizing the default Linux kernel, liquorice is my favourite sweet, and I would like my machine to have the pleasure of chewing on some as well.

Looking at the liqourix web site, I see that it is tracked to Sid, whereas I am using Waldorf. I read pvsage suggesting that installing a liqourix kernel tracked to sid on a wheezy machine is a bad idea. I can understand that. But I also read someone saying liqourix 3.2 is working great.

I'm all for experimentation, but am really, really happy with Waldorf at the moment. I'm running powertop at the moment and power consumption is down to 4.10w !!!!! Yes, pretty amazing me thinks.

This machine is also my work machine, and I need it everyday. I just like the idea of flicking between kernels, especially if its called liqourix. Pretty pathetic of me, and perhaps pointless- but would any support having a go with liqourix? Or should I just try harder to be content with the near-perfection that I have?

Thanks! big_smile

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#126 2011-11-14 11:21:10

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#127 2011-11-22 13:46:07

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#128 2011-11-22 13:53:22

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#129 2011-11-22 15:17:59

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#130 2012-01-09 04:37:29

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#131 2012-01-09 23:53:42

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#132 2012-01-10 00:03:12

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#133 2012-01-10 08:34:43

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#134 2012-03-22 15:18:50

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#135 2012-03-22 15:31:01

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#136 2012-03-22 15:54:30

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#137 2012-03-22 21:33:48

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#138 2012-03-23 10:37:40

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#139 2012-03-23 14:54:53

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#140 2012-03-23 17:04:52

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#141 2012-03-23 18:09:40

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#142 2012-03-24 16:03:03

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#143 2012-05-03 12:25:47

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#144 2012-05-14 20:58:14

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#145 2012-09-29 17:10:49

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#146 2012-09-29 18:27:03

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#147 2012-11-06 04:17:33

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#148 2012-11-06 08:50:10

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#149 2012-11-06 15:22:14

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

#150 2012-11-06 15:51:30

Re: [Why drive when you can FLY?] Liquorix/Zen Kernel

Board footer