From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1S3vKk-0001MT-97 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Mar 2012 20:13:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED866E06EE; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 20:13:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vx0-f181.google.com (mail-vx0-f181.google.com [209.85.220.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28889E05CB for ; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 20:12:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vcge1 with SMTP id e1so1484016vcg.40 for ; Sat, 03 Mar 2012 12:12:20 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of poisonbl@gmail.com designates 10.52.67.115 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.52.67.115; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of poisonbl@gmail.com designates 10.52.67.115 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=poisonbl@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=poisonbl@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.52.67.115]) by 10.52.67.115 with SMTP id m19mr25787634vdt.53.1330805540596 (num_hops = 1); Sat, 03 Mar 2012 12:12:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=F2LHWelXWrutW/hmqV+98gLBgBpq4GdxeShzznqpmC8=; b=iQ2FLoqOdcMfsB7nyjyRFTsT9XlvZjHyjwlmRAwrZihL+ylSSlERnksHlUG0uDyERI C/n1Cfw6FYiiSuiOKLH2koNQGXj4ZqqQzfdAnfkQ9Tk0/8xWUoVUEFL0xZ0xinpTLMeI QCoNaeWKeqjNyz/ltvEqPuHOEgLq5fX71jiOnhOqQIQxSiNN/Gvc4j+XWiwQWmSdA7Lb nGBVH9VAZbydBTmSk5dgPitIpQP626HN39+FnUhDQDTAnZsToRe+1gk5dDsfkJYhS5nG 2Yz4hD/Lc7aHLWzqdU1yyWUwlQn5OJSQNWpT4Ux6Oalb2ae4MzvMTzvwMsM2GpOLSuvK 9w0Q== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.67.115 with SMTP id m19mr22081594vdt.53.1330805540516; Sat, 03 Mar 2012 12:12:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.182.6 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 12:12:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:12:20 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo on a Dell XPS 13 Ultrabook From: Joshua Murphy To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: dd193a6f-5407-420e-8c07-7cedb5ffc3cc X-Archives-Hash: 34ac1b5234047af4a286597b8d916ad0 On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > On Mar 4, 2012 12:54 AM, "Grant" wrote: >> >> >>> I just received the new Dell XPS 13 Ultrabook and I'm trying to >> >>> install Gentoo but I can't get install-amd64-minimal-20120223.iso to >> >>> boot via a USB key. >> >> >> >> Have you tested your boot USB keys on another machine? >> > >> > Gentoo is installed but I can't get my USB->ethernet adapter to bring >> > up an eth0 (or any other) interface. =C2=A0It works if I boot the Kubu= ntu >> > USB key. =C2=A0I've definitely built the correct driver into the kerne= l >> > (mcs7380). =C2=A0I'm going through an emerge world right now to bring >> > everything up to date. =C2=A0Is there anything else I might need to do= ? >> > >> > - Grant >> >> I enabled some more kernel options under USB Network Adapters and it's >> working now. =C2=A0The install is about done but there were a few >> peculiarities: >> >> 1. fdisk won't let me specify a start block before 2048 even though I >> deleted all partitions. >> > > That's normal. It's a long story, but Windows Vista and Windows 7 expects > the first partition to start at sector 2048. > > You can force a lower number by toggling "DOS compatibility"; this should > let you start the first partition as low as sector 63. > > HOWEVER, make sure that all partitions begin at multiples of 8 (e.g., 64, > 72, 80, and so on); this will save you a lot of grief if it happens that = the > hard disk you're using has 4KiB-sectors. [1] >From what I recall of looking at that toy's specs, it's running on an SSD, so it becomes even more important, performance-wise, to have things aligned properly so any one write doesn't cause two full erase blocks to be cycled. The 1MB alignment is, if I recall, a balance Microsoft struck as the midpoint between multiple hardware vendors to work well on any of them... raid arrays, SSDs, advanced format hard drives with 4k sectors on-disk, etc. --=20 Poison [BLX] Joshua M. Murphy