Print

[rcfa]

what exactly does a 132 boot cd do?

It essentially boots a pre-boot sequence that loads into memory a kernel plus the relevant kernel extensions required to continue booting from an unmodified, original Apple Install DVD on non-Apple hardware.

[shoota]

For audio take a look here! 
Instead of using Azalia audio and Audieee, use voodoohda. You need to backup and remove or rename applehda.kext and the azalia kext before installing voodoohda audio. This is a much better audio solution with microphone functionality as well.

There is also a prefpane install for more options.
http://forum.voodooprojects.org/index.php/topic,139.0.html

this seems to be working fairly well. only thing i noticed is a periodic slight skip on higher bit rate audio. i'm not 100 percent sure it's the driver or if it's another factor related to osx (file works fine in XP). also haven't had a chance to test mic functionality. can someone tell me how to test it besides skype since my wireless card hasn't arrived yet?

edit: turns out it may be the file after all.

[rcfa]

For audio take a look here! 
Instead of using Azalia audio and Audieee, use voodoohda. You need to backup and remove or rename applehda.kext and the azalia kext before installing voodoohda audio. This is a much better audio solution with microphone functionality as well.

There is also a prefpane install for more options.
http://forum.voodooprojects.org/index.php/topic,139.0.html

this seems to be working fairly well. only thing i noticed is a periodic slight skip on higher bit rate audio. i'm not 100 percent sure it's the driver or if it's another factor related to osx (file works fine in XP). also haven't had a chance to test mic functionality. can someone tell me how to test it besides skype since my wireless card hasn't arrived yet?

IF you to go System Preferences Audio panel and select input AND you have the sliders set up properly in System Preferences HDA Audio panel AND you select the first of the two mic inputs that show up, THEN you should see the level meter move according to whatever noise you make. Clapping works best, because you should see correlated sharp peaks.

[baller3166]

I hope I don't get flamed for this, just curious if anyone thinks that an OS X wifi driver will ever be written?

-Matt

[rcfa]

I hope I don't get flamed for this, just curious if anyone thinks that an OS X wifi driver will ever be written?

Not by me. I like to have 802.11abgn rather than just 802.11bgn, so that alone is worth spending $30 for an Apple WiFi card, never mind all the hassle with trying to write drivers, and then they will require third party tools and not work with Apple's WiFi configuration in System Preferences, and ...
... in short: just not worth the hassle.

[baller3166]

I'm assuming the apple card works in XP and Windows 7?  I know that's a good option, I just get nervous taking apart my own computers, I was more comfortable doing it as a Firedog for Circuit City when I had someone to back me up, even though I've only screwed up one computer.

[rcfa]

Yup, the card works with windows. You'll have to either download generic Broadcom WiFi drivers for the chip in question, or you need to install the BootCamp driver package from the original Apple Leopard InstallDVD, and then upgrade. Upgrade will only work if you do a full BootCamp install, so I'm not sure it's worth it, but I did it more for the sake of experimenting. On the up side, that also means that if you need more NICs, you can stick Apple's USB Ethernet adapters (meant for the MacBook Air) into any USB port and get more ethernet ports...

[baller3166]

I'll be dual booting with XP, no bootcamp...as long as it works, anyone have a link to the drivers?

I still wish someone would write a driver, I wish I had the skills to do it

[shoota]

guys, did any of you have a problem with your fan not running at all, or did i just screw something up when i replaced the wireless card?

[rcfa]

guys, did any of you have a problem with your fan not running at all, or did i just screw something up when i replaced the wireless card?

You likely didn't put one of the cables (properly) back where it needs to go. If I have a problem with the fan, then that it runs faster/louder than under WinXP because the power management isn't as sophisticated due to lack of machine specific drivers under Mac OS X. Under XP SpeedStep is adjusting between 667MHz and 1.75MHz (yes, it looks like ASUS is doing mild overclocking), and under OS X it only adjusts between 997MHz and 1.67GHz, and of course accordingly the core voltage and heat and fan speed follow.

[ppar]

guys, did any of you have a problem with your fan not running at all, or did i just screw something up when i replaced the wireless card?

Made the same mistake... noticed when my netbook started burning a hole through my pant legs 

[baller3166]

Hey guys I've got everything booting, but OSX loads pretty slow, somewhere between 1-2 minutes, is this normal?
 
My first attempt failed (could only get it to boot with the dvd in) but it booted much faster...unfortunately i had to try again

[rcfa]

Hey guys I've got everything booting, but OSX loads pretty slow, somewhere between 1-2 minutes, is this normal?

What boot option? With or without .mkext? How much RAM?

[shoota]

mine takes that long to boot as well. i'm not sure what an .mkext is. I've got 1 gb ram. standard 1000he

[Paradox]

Hey guys I've got everything booting, but OSX loads pretty slow, somewhere between 1-2 minutes, is this normal?
 
My first attempt failed (could only get it to boot with the dvd in) but it booted much faster...unfortunately i had to try again

Mine definately loads just as quick as winxp home. Only 30sec maybe.. I have only upgraded ram to 2gb, and use only default boot options.

[rcfa]

mine takes that long to boot as well. i'm not sure what an .mkext is. I've got 1 gb ram. standard 1000he

On your EFI partition's Extra folder (or for that matter automatically in /System/Library for the contents of /System/Library/Extensions folder) there can be an Extensions.mkext file, which is kind of like a cache for the individual .kext files in the Extensions folder.
If an .mkext file exists that is current, the load will be a lot faster, because instead of parsing and loading tons of individual .kext files, the loader just sucks in a single (or in the case of a Hackintosh two) Extenisons.mkext file(s). That's a lot faster.

Also, Leopard with 1GB is pushing it. A 2GB SO-DIMM costs like $25, and is TOTALLY worth it. With 1GB Leopard is a total dog, with 2GB it's OK, with 4GB it's great.
The reason Leopard is faster than Tiger on new hardware and slower than Tiger on old hardware is mostly the fact that Apple did space/time trade-offs, and newer machines (can) have a lot more RAM than older ones, some of which are limited to 1GB, and hence Leopard crawls on these thanks to excessive VM usage, while it flies on newer machines with plenty 'o RAM.

So if you're serious about running Mac OS X on the EeePC 1000HE, go spend $25 on a 2GB RAM stick.

To create a .mkext file in your EFI partition, you have to do something akin to this:

Code: [Select]

mkdir /tmp/EFI
mount_hfs /dev/disk0s1 /tmp/EFI
cd /tmp/EFI/Extra/Extensions
rm ../Extensions.mkext
chown -R root:wheel *
chmod -R 755 *
kextcache -a i386 -m ../Extensions.mkext *.kext

Assuming you're booted from /dev/disk0s2 and your EFI partition is /dev/disk0s1, etc.

Also, if you're booting with, or your com.apple.boot.plist contains, e.g. the -f boot option, things will go much slower. In other words, boot speed will be slower if you use unnecessary boot options, have too little RAM, or don't use .mkext files.

Lastly: make sure your permissions on the root drive are correct. If not, things like e.g. /System/Library/Caches might get ignored for security reasons, which again means a slower than required boot process.

[baller3166]

rcfa, thanks for the help

i have 2gb of ram and i havent touched the boot sequence, just followed the steps from the guide on this site.

I'm not an OS X pro, can you maybe give me more detail or step by step directions?  I'd love to fix this problem and it sounds like you might be the one to fix it.  I have XP installed on the first partition of my drive and OS X on the 2nd, the 3rd partition is just storage.

I haven't made any modifications to boot options or anything except the details from the main guide, i.e. getting all the devices to work and selecting the original options during the install

Thanks a ton!!

[baller3166]

Also, I have the chameleon 2 bootloader, sorry i forgot to mention that.

THanks,

[rcfa]

I haven't made any modifications to boot options or anything except the details from the main guide, i.e. getting all the devices to work and selecting the original options during the install

You're "main guide" being this:
http://smallcomputing.net/forums/index.php/topic,3.0.html
or this:
http://smallcomputing.net/forums/index.php/topic,34.0.html

Because the only thing I have experience with, is the latter

Also, the further in you go on your hard drive, the slower it gets. In my case, I have the EFI partition as first partition, OS X as the second partition, a linux-swap partition as place holder, and then WinXP as fourth partition. The whole drive is GUID formatted, not MBR.
So your performance data may not apply, since you might use a rather patched up OS on a non-native partition scheme with the OS at a location that doesn't provide optimal performance.
Plus, since I use a bigger/faster drive, if you consider all the factors, it could amount to a significant performance difference.

[yodadaone]

I haven't made any modifications to boot options or anything except the details from the main guide, i.e. getting all the devices to work and selecting the original options during the install

You're "main guide" being this:
http://smallcomputing.net/forums/index.php/topic,3.0.html
or this:
http://smallcomputing.net/forums/index.php/topic,34.0.html

Because the only thing I have experience with, is the latter

Also, the further in you go on your hard drive, the slower it gets. In my case, I have the EFI partition as first partition, OS X as the second partition, a linux-swap partition as place holder, and then WinXP as fourth partition. The whole drive is GUID formatted, not MBR.
So your performance data may not apply, since you might use a rather patched up OS on a non-native partition scheme with the OS at a location that doesn't provide optimal performance.
Plus, since I use a bigger/faster drive, if you consider all the factors, it could amount to a significant performance difference.

rcfa,
thank you for sharing.  i admitted that i had doubt in your method since no one posted the how-to after you sent it to the 'five' people.

[rcfa]

rcfa,
thank you for sharing.  i admitted that i had doubt in your method since no one posted the how-to after you sent it to the 'five' people.

Just to be fair: I didn't send a "how to" to five people, I send them the required files plus some background info because I don't have the time to write a detailed how to.
What I send is sufficient for any intermediate to advanced hackintosher to get things running, but it's not a how-to guide.

The basics are simple: use the supplied 132-boot CD to boot and install a Apple original install DVD for Mac OS X 10.5.6. Then dd the EFI partition into place, update to 10.5.7, then override the relvant kexts by copying what's in the supplied kext repository into /System/Library/Extensions, making sure the permissions are correct and the .mkext is rebuilt. Done.

The devil is in the detail, and to write a fool-proof how to takes a lot of time, which I don't have.

Eventually, once Chameleon is updated to boot CD/DVDs, the boot-132 CD will no longer be required, because the Chameleon install on the SD card would be sufficient to boot with the SD card inserted into the EeePC, but right now that doesn't work due to limitations in Chameleon.

[baller3166]

What if I just used the ideneb 1.3 dvd, does this mkext method still apply?

[rcfa]

What if I just used the ideneb 1.3 dvd, does this mkext method still apply?

What do you mean with "the mkext method"?
Anyway, while I learned a lot from the various hackintosh approaches, including iDeneb, and therefore am thankful to all the people who contributed to them, I personally want to stay away from them, because they are insufficiently documented and lack transparency in terms of what is modified from the OS. In that sense it makes it hard to learn what's going on, hard to trouble shoot, and difficult to report bugs to third parties, etc.
With the minimal modifications I have in place now, I pretty much know what is or isn't original, and what, if anything, may be contributing to bugs I'm experiencing.
For all intents and purposes, minor issues like sound drivers and power management fine tuning aside, my EeeMac 1000HE is now running as smoothly as any of my real Macs (PowerMac 5DP, PowerBook G4, MacBook Pro, iMac G4).
While the iDeneb thing was a quick fix, it didn't run as smoothly, and it had a distinct "not quite there" feel, which I don't have now.
Things like GarageBand not being able to shrink the main window down to 1024x600 aside, I pretty much have an EeeMac, indistinguishable from anything Apple would ship (well, Apple might put this thing in an Aluminum case, charge $100 more, and I'd be happy to buy it, if only they'd offer something like it...)

[ppar]

you mean more along the lines of $500 more 

[rcfa]

you mean more along the lines of $500 more 

Not really. Apple hardware, despite claims to the opposite, is quite competitive in price when you compare truly comparable systems (e.g. not Celeron or Pentium based computers when Apple has a Xeon in it, etc.).
Also, a made from components computer is not a fair comparison, because you don't count your time as money, so when you compare Dell, Sony, etc. type brand computer against a Mac in the same category, Apple does pretty well, which is why the various ads M$ is currently running as such a hoax, they make it look like as if the people were actually buying comparable machines for a lot less, when the machines they pick are totally sub-par when compared to the Macs they supposedly don't get because "they are just overpriced design".
See http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/26/microsoft_to_attack_mac_pricing_in_new_series_of_tv_ads.html and related articles to debunk the claims of that ad series.

If Apple were to sell a NetBook, it would be in the MacMini segment, which means about $549 or so, which would be about $100 over a fully decked out EeePC. That would be in line with the MacBook being in the iMac segment at around $1k, and the Pro line up at the $2k+ range when properly equipped.