14 Responses to “Images of official OpenELEC builds”

1. 1 Jaanus Rõõmus on October 15, 2012 said:

   Seems like wifi module broke with OpenELEC kernel update (rtl8192*).

   Reply
   • 2 Chris Swan on October 15, 2012 said:

     I saw some issues with DVB drivers not compiling properly due to dependencies not being straight in the make files. I fixed this by deleting the build directory on my build server (so that modules would be compiled against the right kernel headers). Have you tested the latest build (r12088 at time of writing)?

     Reply
2. 3 Wayne Si on October 23, 2012 said:

   Hi Chris, first of all thank a lot for your builds which are very handy and reliable. May I ask if it’s possible to include node.js into the build? There is a GitHub repos at https://github.com/christoph00/OpenELEC.tv where the scripts/image is sightly modified to make and install an extra packages/lang/node. I copied those to the official OpenELEC clone and tried to do the cross-compiling by myself. But after 4 whole-days of trouble-shooting on my Ubuntu 12.10 (I’m a total beginner to Linux BTW), I failed at the step of building node.js because of the classic issue that Python 2.7.3 can’t import bz2 module (it’s lying). I tried all sorts of solution on the StackOverflow but no luck. Could you please help? Thanks a lot.

   Reply
3. 4 Dmitri on November 28, 2012 said:

   Hi, do you have plans to provide Raspberry Pi OpenELEC 3.0 Builds, so far (Beta 1) – 2.95.1?
   E.g.: http://releases.openelec.tv/OpenELEC-RPi.arm-2.95.1.tar.bz2
   Thank you.

   Reply
   • 5 Chris Swan on November 28, 2012 said:

     Done – OpenELEC-RPi.arm-2.95.1.img.zip

     Reply
     • 6 Dmitri on November 28, 2012 said:

       Thanks a lot!!
4. 7 Dmitri on November 28, 2012 said:

   Just out of curiosity (and apologies if this has been previously explained elsewhere), what is the difference between:
   http://resources.pichimney.com/OpenELEC/r12577.img.zip
   and
   http://resources.pichimney.com/OpenELEC/official_images/r12577.img.zip
   Thanks,

   Reply
   • 8 Chris Swan on November 30, 2012 said:

     In principle there should be no difference, as both builds originate from the same git source. In practice I expect that there are subtle variations that mean the files aren’t exactly the same.

     Reply
5. 9 Tim on November 28, 2012 said:

   Thanks Chris for the builds and for hosting ’em – I make use of them daily !!

   A humble request – would it be possible to include a changelog file which notes what has changed in the various builds ? I am having a VERY tough time knowing what has changed within XMBC and/or openELEC to get a sense of what to expect. I’m currently blindly downloading an image to see what’s within – if there is a method by which a changelog can be extracted or deciphered, by all means let me know.

   BTW: how the release number (r12617 for instance) relates to the GitHub hex tag ? Is there a way to see what has changed, in GitHub, between r12606 and r12617 ?

   Thanks.

   Reply
   • 10 Chris Swan on November 28, 2012 said:

     I don’t keep a change log, as it’s all in the GitHub commit history. I see the problem though in relating release numbers to that history, and I don’t have an easy fix for that. Personally I subscribe to the commit RSS, so I have an idea what will be in a new release when I download it.

     Reply
6. 11 Henning Andersen on January 11, 2013 said:

   First of all, thank you for a great service :)
   Second, Why do the official builds only go to build 12577, when you have (as of today) a build 12823 in the OpenELEC folder?

   I have a openelec-nightly_latest.sh script that doesn’t update to the newer builds as it is now. Should I just change the script to look in the parent folder? Or is that not recommended? :)

   Reply
   • 12 Chris Swan on January 11, 2013 said:

     There haven’t been any official dev builds since they started doing the beta/RC cycle for OpenELEC 3.0.

     I’ve yet to figure out the alignment between the various beta/RC builds and the numbering for dev builds, but it’s possible to get a good approximation by looking at the release date.

     Reply
7. 13 Tim on January 13, 2013 said:

   Chris, thanks as usual for hosting, replying and your help in general.

   I’m still having a tough time figuring out how to pull (ie. download) something from GitHub that relates to say release ‘r12913’. Where did this 12913 number come from and how do I relate it back to the github repository/history.

   So say in 10 days from now I want to download the source code that constituted r12913, how do I go about downloading that source from github ? Which commands (linux command-line please) should I use ?

   I believe you had noted that the ‘rXXXX’ numbers don’t relate to the commit hex figures in gitHub (which is SUPER confusing to say the least) and that one should rely on dates – noted. How do I pull something down that is from 10 or 20 days ago so that I can do what is noted above. Does git offer a ‘date’ option or similar or do I have to reply to the hashes ?

   I’m not too familiar with git (will be reading its help files/docs shortly) but I am VERY familiar with CVS/SVN.

   Sorry if I seem confused… cause I am :-)

   Thanks.

   Reply
   • 14 Chris Swan on January 13, 2013 said:

     There’s a thread on the OpenELEC forum that explains a little more what’s going on.

     Also, when you ssh into a dev build it gives you the git hash e.g.:

     OpenELEC Version: devel-20130113154303-r12914
     OpenELEC git: fe18e7920a8388b178ff194b4705881a2bd7f66f

     Which corresponds to this commit

     I’m no git expert, though I have had cause in the past to use cherry-pick in order to grab a specific commit. This guide to git does a reasonable job of explaining how to time travel.

     Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.