[ltp] sound on Thinpad 600 with Sarge (Yet again...)

[jeff]

On Tuesday 19 July 2005 4:47, wim@djo.tudelft.nl wrote:
> > <jdavis70@tampabay.rr.com> writes:
> >
> > On Monday 18 July 2005 10:07, wim@djo.tudelft.nl wrote:
> > > ANY attempt to start a 2.6 kernel will disable the sound chip
> > > permanently. The good news is that the damage appears not to be
> > > irreversible. However, all methods to get it back to life are all quite
> > > tedious and not suitable for Joe Average. (The question remains if
> > > there is any Joe Average using a TP600?)
> >
> > I think the problem with Sarge is with the detection routine, not the
> > kernel.
>
> The detection routines are IN the kernel. Unless you define the kernel to
> be a subset of the bzImage file you get when compiling a kernel.
> The detection routines obviously mangle the sound system.

I have never compiled a 2.6 kernel, so I'll take your word on that.

> Why a 2.6 kernel crashes on two different TP600s I wouldn't know.

The first version of Mepis with the 2.6 kernel would crash during boot on my 
600 too. The next release worked OK.

> > I have tried Mandrake and Mepis (which is based on sarge) on my 600 with
> > the 2.6 kernel. Sound worked OK with both distros. A clean install of
> > Debian sarge with the 2.6 kernel messes up my sound card though.
>
> Here you say managed to run 2.6 on yours.
> Might it be that there are other kind of TP600s around, with different
> hardware?

Very possible, since some people seem to have trouble with the sound and 
modem, while others are autodetected and work perfectly with the same distro.

> I don't have the precise type indicator at hand here.
> I have a small screen version with 64MB and a version with a larger
> screen with only 32MB. Both will crash.

Mine is a 2645-45U, with 128MB. After testing a few different distros, I can't 
tell that the 2.6 kernel offers any advantage over the 2.4 kernel on the 600. 
And ALSA seems to work better with the 2.4 kernel on mine.

Jeff