64 Studio 2.1 Installation Error (tetex-bin error)

The forthcoming Ubuntu 10.04 Lucid is the LTS release, but we may do an interim release based on 9.10 (Karmic) as it may take some time for Lucid to settle down. Free has already built PDK components for Karmic and we also have some Karmic backports underway.

I am using 9.10 on my entertainment PC, as a host to Myth-TV. No problems there. FWIW, the next beta will be based on 9.10 in preparation for the upcoming ubuntu 10.04 LTS which will be the base of 64 Studio 4. Note that we will probably never have a free OS 64 Studio release marked as "stable" even though it will undoubtedly be as stable as a rock... In that case Beta is good enough for me! Hope you enjoy 64S as much as I have. (edit: Fixed my numbers ;-)

I have been using 64Studio 2.1 for over a year now .. I have just installed 64Studio 3.0 beta 3 on a P4 SOYO Dragon motherboard. I must give you a-pat-on-the-back for doing a darn good job !!! For new users out there take heed to a few "gotchas": Make sure ALL harddrives are masters !!! if you have a board like mine (and this goes for the Gigabyte 8KNXP ) you have 4 pata and 4 sata ports. For some unknown reason ( to me) if you have two harddrives on the same controller ( master/slave - primary interface ) and a master DVD on the 2ndary interface the install will go with out a hitch .. but GRUB gets confused .. The install does not look at PATA as first in the food chain. ( I know .. who use IDE/PATA drives anyway ... I do because I have them and I dont like to waste pieces and parts ! I had instances where my master PATA hard drive was assigned SCSI-6 -- NOT GOOD... and when you have to work a day job the last thing you want to do is think about GRUB...) Just move the DVD-drive to Slave on the master and set the slave harddrive as master on the 2ndary PATA -- if you are running straight SATA (or DVD on PATA and hard drives on SATA all will be ok. Your devices will be in order .. This is very much true for 64Studio 3.0 beta 3 This is not a 64Studio issue per se its just the way Ubuntu works up to 8.10 Intrepid. 9.04 ~ 9.10 does not seem to exhibit this behaviorl. As for upgrading ... Be warned I have not met a distro yet that when you try to get the "latest and greatest" that things go completely smooth .. particularly now... the newest FFADO drivers require kernel 2.6.32 or better ... plus another package ( forget the name ) 2.0.5 or greater.. if you want REAL TIME for 2.6.32 don't hold your breath .. it isn't coming unless someone is kind enough to compile it for you or you do it yourself .. FFADO is using a new fire wire stack that is not compatible ... sucks if you like "rolling your own setup." I have read many forums on the "One vs the Other" I love 64 studio for its low latency and its robustness I have pounded it with software synths and such with narry a glitch - I like UbuStu for its cutting edge apps particularly in the graphics and video ( installing Cinelerra is a cinch ( thanks akirad !)) It works for Debian too ... So what does this mean to the end user ? Do your part on research! keep up with the forums and if it aint broke... dont try to fix it. I learned that lesson the hard way more times than I care to count. I have two great systems .. one where I can be creative musically and one where I can create beautiful images. Thanks To the 64Studio team for a great distro. Quentin... If you haven't played with it yet check out Ubuntu 10.04 unfortunately the kernel is 2.6.32 however I don't see why yours cant be placed in its place or even 2.6.33 with your patches. I gave it a brief go 'round trying to get my Mia midi card to work... Let it be known that 64Studio is one of the few distros where that card works out-of-the-box! Inshort .. if you the user are wiping out your boot drives and such you are not paying close attention to what you are doing... Linux is like a high performance car ... you just cant throw parts together and call it a car. PEACE..

Cheers. I am not the developer. Have a nice live. I certainly wont miss you. Searching the forums certainly would not have hurt you. I believe the topic is even a sticky. Quentin Harley, over and out.

So, what I'm getting from all this. . . 64Studio is not installable except by manipulation of BIOS or redirection of apt sources? I've tried intermittently to install this OS since early 2009 and now in 2010 re-downloaded and wiped out my boot table several times thinking I'm not getting it or my system is incompatible. Now I see this is an ongoing problem that the developers have chosen not to address. I wonder how many other curious installers, like myself, have just tossed the CD into the Distro's of Christmases Past bin and written it off as simply "not-working". My assessment: Lousy OS that developer uses to generate interest in its website for info harvesting and doesn't give a shit about its product. Maybe a scam? Not worth the time to investigate. tekn0phyle signing off

Here is the source list that was suggested in the online manual: # deb cdrom:[64studio 2.1 (1)]/ 64studio main deb http://64studio.hivelocity.net/apt/ 64studio main deb-src http://64studio.hivelocity.net/apt/ 64studio main deb http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/ etch main contrib non-free deb-src http://ftp.us.debian.org.debian/ etch main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org/ etch/updates main deb-src http://security.debian.org/ etch/updates main deb http://apt.64studio.com/backports/ etch-backports main deb-src http://apt.64studio.com/backports/ etch-backports main The "deb cdrom" was the only thing installed after my first boot. I then set up this list. The /debian/etch gets kicked back as well as the secrity repo that was suggested to get from debian. So, what are we supposed to have on this list???

Hi guys. I was having the same problem. It has nothing to do with your bios clock. Please go reset your clocks to default time. Please post your source.list login password su password cat /etc/apt/sources.list Show what you get. My bet is that zero debs are installed which means no GUI. Now my question is what are the proper debs to be listed there. Mine just has the CD source listed. What do I add so my system know what to install?

TeX is a typesetting tool, specifically to create complex mathematical equations. TeTeX was a free and open source implementation of TeX, maintained by Thomas Esser. He decided to stop maintaining the package. The package had a date check in it, a way for him to make sure people do not install very old packages, and this has come to haunt us now, unfortunately. In recent linux TeTex is replaced by TeX Live. 64 Studio developers always use GNU packages, except for the case of the mp3 decoder library, fluendo, for which the 64 studio company holds a licence.

...about that install error, as far as I understand is due to the use of a proprietary font, which somehow had an expiry date. If that's correct, I can't understand why the devels used that kind of thing. There are free fonts around. Anyone figures out an explanation?

Hi, new here, signed in a minute ago. I've been trying many hours to install 64studio 2.1 with every kind of noapic, nolapic, pci=routeirq, etc, and also burning at low speed a number of DVD images of both 32 and 64 bit versions. I was about to leave. Well, let's be positive. Now it has just installed (thanks to the hint in this thread), and I think I'll like that thingie. I'm coming from two years of ubuntu, which I love for what it stands for, and will probably carry on using for not-musical tasks. But for music, I'm fed up of pulse audio, which ubuntu insists on shipping, and that gives nothing but problems. Furthermore, in last version (karmic) it's harder than ever to whipe pulseaudio without make a mess of your system. Also disliked grub2 very much. Let's see if my hammerfall dsp 9632 is now usable in 64studio. I expect so. Perhaps also my old usb maudio mobile pre. I think there are no chances for my tascam fw1804, which I'd better to sell it out if I want to stick in gnu-linux. ... anyway ... good evening everybody :-) JC ________________________

Hi, I was wondering how to enter the bios? I have a macbook pro and I've heard they have something called "OpenFirmware" instead of a BIOS...?

I had success with the 2.0 and the 2.1 setting back the time to 2005 and then after installing I just went into bios and set time to 2009. But I did not try installing debian etch first and then adding the apt.sources pointed to 64studio. I dont even know if the etch release is being updated at all or supported but I tend to just use 64studio as is and work with out internet connection at all on the machine I use for audio recording.

Hi all i have the same problem, debian runs great and stable but 64 studio have the tetex-bin error. I have burn more than 3 dvds too bad all waste. its not cheap. *g* I hope this would be fixed. I have load the beta 3 but same error, whats going on? fix that pleaseeee.

HI Guys This is a serious error. There must be a way of removing this package I#m stuck at this error. Also Grub seems to have eaten my Ubuntu install this time.

I would try 3.0 beta3, or if you want to use 2.1, change the date back only a year or two. 2007 should be fine...

I had the same problem installing 2.1. Reset the BIOS clock, and still had the install failure. It's possible I didn't set the clock back far enough, as I was in a hurry and didn't pay too close attention to the date I selected. I wonder, is it possible to pass a "no tetex" command at the beginning of the install, or is tetex vital to Etch?? Thank Mike You pay what you get for.

Yes, this would be a very, very logical thing to add to the README file or something. Not a great first experience with 64Studio. :( Thanks, Heartarchy, for solving this one.

It seems to me that it would be a good idea to pull the link to the 2.1 image file from this (64Studio) web site, as I did exactly what Vallabhc did - thought it might be a problem with my original installer DVD so downloaded new yesterday, burned new DVD, and then attempted an install. I then downloaded the Live version 2, thinking maybe I used it to install last time but alas, it has no feature for installing... Having the current 2.1 pulled from the site, or at the very least a warning about the Tetex error, would have saved me much time and frustration. Donn Busby Electronics Inc

Yes, thank you for this solution, I'll try it tomorrow. I was just online to post the same problem, but did a search in the forum first. I thought I was reading my own question before I wrote it! This problem is rather like the warranty that runs out right before you need it... The stale date for the Latex source files must have just run out. I'm hoping it's a relatively easy task to upgrade to v3 when it's released. Cheers! Donn Busby Electronics Inc

Thanks for solving this one. There are still people using 2.1, even though 3.0 should have been released already... Cheers, Q

Success.

I just read it could be something about the latex source files being over five years old. Try entering the BIOS and changing the clock back a few years. I'm about to give it a shot, I'll let you know if it does the charm. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=531569 -Troy

Although I am sorry to say I can't help you, I am having the same problem. I just wanted to have a fresh 2.1 install and, as if by magic, it refuses to get past tetex-bin. I tried four times from a known-good dvd I've used to install many, many times before. It's very strange. Good luck though.