Recent posts

#31

Installation / Re: boot from iso can't find w...

Last post by geop - December 29, 2025, 04:57:27 AM

Many thanks for the suggestion, but I've now tried that both without and with sudo, and in each case, it returned immediately to the terminal prompt with no output. The network icon popup still says "No network devices available".

I saw nothing in journalctl either.

Sorry I didn't reply more quickly, but I didn't see your reply until now because I failed to notice I had to explicitly request alerts. Fixed now.

#32

Installation / Re: boot from iso can't find w...

Last post by pavroo - December 28, 2025, 08:45:11 PM

Try to enable it manually:

Code Select Expand

systemctl start NetworkManager

#33

Installation / boot from iso can't find wifi ...

Last post by geop - December 28, 2025, 05:52:42 PM

Downloaded sparky rolling xfce version iso from sourceforge, and did check sha256. On iso boot, no wifi. Icon popup says "No network devices available".

Running dmesg -k, I found this:

[   10.853172] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: enabling device (0000 -> 0002)
[   10.853413] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: firmware: failed to load mediatek/WIFI_RAM_CODE_MT7922_1.bin (-2)
[   10.853423] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: firmware: failed to load mediatek/WIFI_RAM_CODE_MT7922_1.bin (-2)
[   10.853434] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: firmware: failed to load mediatek/WIFI_RAM_CODE_MT7922_1.bin (-2)
[   10.853435] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: Direct firmware load for mediatek/WIFI_RAM_CODE_MT7922_1.bin failed with error -2

The last four lines of that are then repeated ten times, which is then followed by this:

[   11.725202] mt7921e 0000:01:00.0: hardware init failed

My system:

Framework-16
Processors: 16 × AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS w/ Radeon 780M Graphics
Memory: 32 GiB of RAM (30.7 GiB usable)
Graphics Processor: AMD Radeon 780M Graphics
Manufacturer: Framework
Product Name: Laptop 16 (AMD Ryzen 7040 Series)
System Version: A7

The laptop is currently running KDE Linux and KaOS with no wifi issues. Sparky was going to be my fun, experimental, distro.

Any suggestions?

[NOTHING was incorrect]

#34

Installation / Re: Sha256sum and bad signatur...

Last post by AxL - December 26, 2025, 07:39:58 PM

[....]  I'm assuming they were fixed in the last few hours.

They haven't fixed anything, because NOTHING was incorrect, tolai.


The isos are exactly the same as the ones, I checked this morning (at 02:16:24 AM and 02:38:14 AM).
 As you can see in the links in these two images:







 Where all the checksums were absolutely correct.








FOPM

#35

Installation / Re: Sha256sum and bad signatur...

Last post by mmah - December 26, 2025, 06:38:58 PM

Settle down big fellow. Sorry if I pissed in your cornflakes. I've downloaded the iso image,checksums, and signature again. Yes, sha256sum and signature match.

I'm assuming they were fixed in the last few hours. https://sourceforge.net/p/sparkylinux/activity/?page=0&limit=100#694eafad8cc2817262c63797

Thanks for the warm welcome.

[Notified the administrator with your lies and FUD]

#36

Installation / Re: Sha256sum and bad signatur...

Last post by AxL - December 26, 2025, 12:42:08 PM

[....]  Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

Notified the administrator with your lies and FUD .... 

['sourceforge.net']

#37

Installation / Re: Sha256sum and bad signatur...

Last post by AxL - December 26, 2025, 02:38:14 AM

[....] Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

By the way, the first images were from 'sourceforge.net' (Mirror 1).

And this one is from 'archive.org' (Mirror 2):





And, absolutely all checksums are also all correct.

[completely FALSE]

#38

Installation / Re: Sha256sum and bad signatur...

Last post by AxL - December 26, 2025, 02:16:24 AM

[....] Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match.

Well, it seems that what you say is completely FALSE.

As you can see in the attached images:







Since not only the sha256sum is totally correct. They are also md5sum, sha1sum and of course sha512sum.
So, stop spouting nonsense and deceiving other users with FUD & hoaxes.







Cheers !! 

#39

Installation / Sha256sum and bad signature.

Last post by mmah - December 26, 2025, 12:40:43 AM

Hi all. Downloaded the Xfce amd64 8.1 version. Sha256sum does not match. Gpg verification reports "bad signature". Hopefully just a mixup. Needless to say but I won't be installing.

I was around when Mintlinux iso images were hacked some years ago so nice to see developers signing iso images. Many do not.

#40

Newbie questions / Re: Edit Main Menu

Last post by pavroo - December 21, 2025, 12:20:39 PM

Create a desktop file in your home directory, for example:
~/.local/share/applications/your-app.desktop
and create content:

Code Select Expand

[Desktop Entry]
Type=Application
Name=app-name
Exec=/path/to/app
StartupNotify=false
Terminal=false
Icon=/path/to/icon
Categories=Application;Network;