"Could not activate this XO" error

[Bert Freudenberg]

It works for me in B2 to B4, but B1 fails to activate (SHF00000000),

- Bert -

On Jul 23, 2007, at 14:42 , Tibi wrote:

> Ok, guys, I've been testing continuously since my last mail.
> Using the latest existing olpc-auto.zip file, I made it to install  
> 499 and 502 but when I tried 525, 527, 528 it failed again.
>
> Could not activate this XO.
> Serial Number: SHF7140010D
>
> I have 256 MB of RAM but maybe my laptop isn't B2 but B1. It had  
> Q2C11 firmware and 2 days ago I upgraded to Q2C18  and first I  
> tried installing XO 528. That's my story. I've read again and again  
> the wiki, I told you I even translated a good part of it in  
> Romanian, is not that. The algorithm presented there doesn't work  
> for me... :(
>
> It must be something I can do.
> Tibi
>
>
> On 7/23/07, Bert Freudenberg < bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote: The  
> auto update boot script supports both nand1234.img and
> os123456.img naming schemes, both fit into 8.3 FAT.
>
> Maybe we should use one for dev builds and the other for stable  
> builds.
>
> >     Renaming the installation file does not change the version
> > number that
> >     is actually stored in the NAND FLASH as a result of the
> > installation.
>
> I thought that was obvious - sorry for not mentioning it, and thanks
> for spelling it out.
>
> - Bert -
>
> On Jul 23, 2007, at 5:57 , Mitch Bradley wrote:
>
> > Kim Quirk wrote:
> >> Thanks Mitch! I didn't know that.
> >>
> >> Do you think that is the best way to do the downgrade? I already
> >> changed the Autoreinstallation page to the notes I above. The
> >> possible problem at the end of the downgrade didn't sound good;
> >> and we are going to start using stable release numbers >1000, so
> >> if you do change it back, please keep that in mind.
> > I think the rename method is good.  It is simple, effective, and  
> safe.
> >
> > As Dan points out, you have to both rename the file to e.g.
> > nand6000.img and change the corresponding number in olpc.fth .
> >
> > Be sure to respect the 8.3 limitation on the filename - nand60000
> > will fail on a FAT filesystem.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Kim
> >>
> >> On 7/22/07, *Mitch Bradley* < wmb at laptop.org
> >> <mailto: wmb at laptop.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Kim Quirk wrote:
> >>     > I don't recommend that your rename your nand to a higher  
> build
> >>     number
> >>     > than it actually is just to avoid a downgrade. You may never
> >> be able
> >>     > to catch up (or catch back down to the proper version).
> >>     >
> >>
> >>     Renaming the installation file does not change the version
> >> number that
> >>     is actually stored in the NAND FLASH as a result of the
> >> installation.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel