I'm looking for a guide to get started with these that involves stripping them down a bit so that I can increase the onboard swap file size to at least 2GB, maybe 3GB. Right now, the swap file is under 1GB. I just got two of them yesterday. They feel very much like a 'concrete straitjacket' because Intel loads them up pretty good and you start seeing it bog down fairly soon once you start doing anything with it.
If there is no specific guide for the STCK1A8LFC then I'll try to create one myself so that these things can be made more usable. I already see the wisdom of getting myself a wireless keyboard and mouse kit right now. Once you get a Bluetooth keyboard & mouse working then you can ditch that.
I purchased these things knowing they were very low on resources and I didn't intend to push them thing hard at all. I just want it to run one or two apps maximum.
$30 each with free shipping, I figured how could I lose.
Once I get it optimized, I'll be buying a truckload for a hobby/project I'm working on.
Guy in Salem, NH on Ebay has almost 2,000 of them for sale.
OK, will do. BTW, the UEFI shell I was in earlier is a 32-bit shell but the Intel Intel Integrator Toolkit (which in one place clearly shows it's compatible with STCK1A8LFC) is actually not and I'm not sure why they list it as being compatible.
The EFI file inside the ZIP file can't be run under the UEFI shell although I can access the USB stick to the folder where the file is and see it. Error was words to the effect of the shell being 32-bit and the EFI file being 64-bit.
This makes me wonder if there is either a 64-bit shell or else a 32-bit version of ITK. The ITK version is 6, so there certainly must be older versions of it.
I'm trying to hit this thing every which way I can think of. I did put a support ticket into Intel for an older (32-bit) version of ITK. Certainly they must have one.
First of all, while it is true that the built-in, 32-bit UEFI Shell is not able to run the file, you can always boot a 64-bit UEFI Shell off secondary storage and then run it there. Building an image for a bootable UEFI Shell is fairly straight forward.
Secondly, ITK 6.0 was a from-scratch, UEFI-based replacement for the previous DOS/Windows and Legacy BIOS implementation, which was designed long, long ago to support Intel's (now defunct) Desktop Board products and thus was suffering from age-related compatibility and security issues (hint: nothing ships with known security issues).
Third, it is unclear (to me anyway) what you wanted to accomplish with the UEFI Shell anyway. I thought you wanted to build a different Ubuntu image with larger swap file. What changes to the BIOS configuration are you thinking will help you accomplish that?
Finally, for what you (vaguely) say you are trying to accomplish, I (naively) wonder whether one of the embedded Linux distros might make a lot more sense?
No, the ITK executable is a UEFI Shell executable; it does not run under the Linux Shell.
No, I don't believe that there are any additional (hidden) Setup parameters that ITK can make available.
I have had absolutely zero success getting this particular Stick (the STCK1A8LFC) to boot from a USB flash device. I was successful with the later SC and CC models but not with the FC. That said, I haven't yet tried doing the same thing on the 32GB versions of this stick (STCH1A32WFC); I have only tried on the 8GB FC.
BTW, I have two of these 8GB FC Sticks. In both cases, after getting wireless going, Ubuntu automatically started an update. After the update completed and I rebooted, it is not seeing the Wireless device at all. Too bad I didn't notice this before I let the second one do the update. I am, so far, at a loss regarding how to get the device working again.
What made me think it was merely a 32-bit vs. 64-bit thing was when I tried to run it, it gave this specific error:
Image type X64 is not supported by this IA32 shell.
I'll create the bootable 64-bit UEFI image and see what happens. Very curious.
I am coming to the conclusion with these 1A8LFC sticks that because they have so little resources memory and storage-wise that if I can get it to boot off USB, I want to completely zero out the SD card and install a stripped down version of Linux on it.
What I have seen happen is that there are a TON of updates (3 years worth) plus a large OEM LTS Installer which bog it down to nothing and it keeps giving disk space errors and something about com.ubuntu.apport.apport-gtk-root crashing.
May not be worth salvaging if I cannot boot from a USB to reinstall the OS.
That will be the thrust of my communication with Intel going forward. I want to put something on here which is more bare bones so I can actually use it.
Creating bootable USB stick now.
Yea, after my experience, I definitely want to look for a lighter version of Linux to play with. Ubuntu is designed for noobs that need a simpler, command line-free Linux and this certainly gets in the way (especially its device setup).
Why are you worried about zeroing out the eMMC? Just delete all partitions before proceeding with your Linux installation. Deleting all partitions is supposed to be a signal to completely replace the partition table, etc.
I will be continuing my investigation into why I cannot boot from a flash stick...
It's just habit. Once I can boot from a USB then I'll try some other things.
BTW, this is a better representation of a generic bootable USB:
Once I can do that, I'll see if I can create a USB stick with pendrivelinux that boots to it next.
HEY! IT WORKED! I was able to boot from the USB stick into a 64-bit UEFI shell using that last method to create the FAT32 formatted stick with the 4 files in /efi/boot
Now I can try some other things. I'll keep you posted. This is getting much more interesting.
Well, I was trying to boot MSDOS, so perhaps this is telling us that there is no support for Legacy boot (though I was told (perhaps incorrectly) that the CSM was there).
I was able to run the ITK6.efi file (Intel Integrator Toolkit version 6) that wouldn't run yesterday on the native 32-bit shell). It gives a bunch of options.
I'm thinking I turned the corner on this thing. So the next goal is to figure out now I can boot from this to install an OS.
Having the UEFI boot files on a disk doesn't help if the goal is to boot DOS. You need a BIOS with Legacy boot (CSM) support. If it has only UEFI boot support then you are not going to boot DOS.
Intel has been shipping BIOS with UEFI (or just EFI, as Intel called it before open sourcing it in 2004 (as Tiano) and turning it over to (what became) the UEFI forum in 2005) for 20+ years. It is only lately that they have dropped Legacy boot (CSM) support, however.