Re: P6T Deluxe Driver install ( / Re: "stringent" )
Post by Webunny » 23 Apr 2014 08:30
Anyway, as far as real HW testing goes, the more, the better. I note that some haven't tried the any new builds in months, though, so here's an appeal to all HW testers to try out another build on their machines (especially those who failed to get it working with other builds). I'm thinking of, ultimately, making a visual representation (much like the one on IGG), where the progress of ROS working on rigs over time (with the progression of builds) is plotted and shown. For that, the more input (number of builds), the better. A 100 or so in total would be the minimum.
I test regularly, but I have not been entering the revisions numbers in the RIGS wiki, because I thought that it was a waste of time filling a box with all the revision numbers.
Webunny: Why not make a mock-up of your proposed progress graph and that way encourage the rest of the hardware testers to fill the boxes with numbers.
Please keep the Windows classic 9x/2000 look and feel.
The layman's guides - debugging - bug reporting - compiling - ISO remaster.
They may help you with a problem, so do have a look at them.
Also perhaps the "Working Builds" entry should be renamed to ... say, "Revisions Tested (works/fails)" (or similar) this way people won't assume that only builds that are working should be entered.
I reserve the right to ignore any portion of any post if I deem it not constructive or likely to cause the discussion to degenerate.
justincase wrote:Also perhaps the "Working Builds" entry should be renamed to ... say, "Revisions Tested (works/fails)" (or similar) this way people won't assume that only builds that are working should be entered.
Just adding 2 minor things:
1. The link to the ROS Rigs page
2. I added the Working / Not Working part to the head of the table to make it slightly clearer. If that's dumb/awkward/whatever, feel free to revert that change.
I've been quite busy, but I'll try to test a recent build today if I can scrounge up the time.
What would be really useful is a GUI tool to report hardware results. Something with a few basic tests (play a sound, test internet connectivity, change resolution, etc). Takes the results, a list of all the PCI device ID's on the system, and the ReactOS build number, puts it in a text file. Enter your reactos.org username and pass and it uploads it for you.
I note that there now seems to be an 'Official ReactOS testing notebook' ? Didn't know we had such a thing (in any official capacity). Is it located at the HQ in Germany, then?
What model is it? May be some people on the forum have the same or a similar one and can help with testing. first step toward ROS HCL (hardware compatibility lab)
Black_Fox wrote:It's Dell Latitude D531, you can see details at PC ROS Rigs wiki page this thread deals with, by default it's the first system in the table.
Heh. That's why I was asking. I saw it on that page.
It wasn't default there when I made the wikipage, and it surprised me a bit, since normally one would go from old to new (as put in the wiki). But if it's an 'official' test PC, I guess it does make for an exception, I guess.
fred02 wrote:@Black_Fox Thanks for the link.
I have nothing similar though.
It's always a bit of guesswork whether or not ROS will work on your rig. Especially laptops seem to have a problem, but I'm not sure why. But I'm quite confident that, as time passes, more and more HW PC's will work, as ROS gets more and more Windows-like.
I probably didn't express myself clearly-enough. I was hoping helping with testing/bug reports on similar hardware, but perhaps different environment.
As for the laptops, they often use customised versions of common components and may expose some border cases (bugs). That's why many manufacturers strongly suggest using drivers only from their sites (please, no stories about how someone used generic drivers for years, I'm aware that they mostly do.)
first step toward ROS HCL (hardware compatibility lab) 
