Re: Gfx Boot Customizer 1006 Download
Jason Ramgel
Hello there! We take your privacy seriously, and want to be as transparent as possible. So: We (and our partners) use cookies to collect some personal data from you. Some of these cookies we absolutely need in order to make things work, and others you can choose in order to optimize your experience while using our site and services. It's up to you!
Additionally, we and our advertising partners store and/or access information on your device and also process personal data, like unique identifiers, browsing activity, and other standard information sent by your device including your IP address. This information is collected over time and used for personalized ads, ad measurement, audience insights, and product development specific to our ads program.
If this sounds good to you, select \"I Agree!\" below. Otherwise, you can get more information, customize your consent preferences, or decline consent by selecting \"Learn More\". Note that your preferences apply only to Tumblr. If you change your mind in the future you can update your preferences any time by using the Privacy link beneath each ad. One last thing: Some of your data may be processed by our advertising partners based on legitimate interests instead of consent, but you can object to that by choosing \"Learn More\" and then disabling the Legitimate Interests toggle under any listed Purpose or Partner on their respective settings pages.
A few months ago, another boot making company has come to my attention: Renav Goods Company based in South Jakarta. This relatively small company has been making a splash on Instagram lately (@renavgoodsco), especially with their DRB-1006 derby. Based on their Instagram feed, their build quality and finishing appeared solid, and the design of their derby is very similar to the LVL01 derbies from Onderhoud. Intrigued, I decided to reach out to Renav Goods Company, and decided to purchase a pair of their MTO derbies. With Onderhoud so difficult to order right now, I wanted to see for myself (and anyone else interested) if a small boot maker like Renav could be a reasonable alternative for a beautifully built and designed derby.
(Left: An example of a double leather midsole and a single layer heel stack. In my opinion, the leather midsole looks too even all the way from toe to heel. Right: An example of an overly extreme woodsman heel, where it appears to curve back out at the base.)
Unboxed, I was quite impressed with how these derbies looked! They had a nice weight to them, about the same as my Onderhoud derbies. Does weight imply use of quality materials? No, not necessarily, but I like when my boots have a bit of heft to them. It feels sturdy.
Compare the profile of Renavs above to the Onderhouds below. While very similar, you can see the slight difference between the lasts, particularly at the tip of the toe. The Renav toe is a bit flatter and sharper, while the Onderhoud toe is a bit more round and beak-like. I ordered both of these toes unstructured though, so they should both collapse some with wear.
My Onderhouds in cognac Badalassi Carlo Minerva leather (left) beside my new Renovs in brown Horween double horse front (right). Even brand new, the grain and depth of color of this leather is incredible.
I chose to go with 270 veldschoen construction with white stitching on these Renav derbies, as I have with most of my Indonesian footwear. Under close inspection, this welt stitching is some of the cleanest of my footwear collection. The two rows of stitching are very neat and parallel all around the anterior of the derby, with relatively short and dense stitches. The transition from single to double row stitching is also very clean.
I will note that Renav did glue down the cushioned insole, while Rizky from Onderhoud did not, making it removable. Unfortunately, Renav currently does not offer any other type of insole without cushion, but hopes to in the future.
Other than the length issue, Renav did a great job accommodating my monstrously wide bunions! As always, width is my biggest concern when buying any footwear, and is a big reason I pretty much only buy MTO/MTM these days.
Secondly, are these derbies worth the price of $390? I say definitely, 100%. For the amount that Renav puts into their derby, from the well balanced pattern, the quality of the leather and materials, and the level of finishing, these are an absolute steal. I could easily see myself buying another pair from them in the future (even without a discount), and I would recommend them to anyone in a heartbeat.
The newer Intel RST RAID drivers are worse for old Intel chipsets like yours.
Tip: Before you are going to upgrade to Win10, I recommend to uninstall the Intel RST Software from within the Control Panel. Once Win10 is up and running, you can reinstall the RST Software.
Hi, thanks for the reply.
I looked at the driver thread and it said that v11.2.0.1006 is the best version for X79, has something changed in the past two years? Also I am going to do a clean install of Windows.
Yes, the Intel RST driver v11.2.0.1006 is the best performing RAID driver, but it is not easy to get it properly installed with Win10. You have to remove the in-box Intel RAID driver from the boot.wim and install.wim of the Win10 image and to integrate the desired Intel RST RAID driver instead according >this
Ok, so v11.2.0.1006 is better than v12.9.4.1000 but since it is harder to get working v11.2.0.1006 was suggested to me 2 years ago? Also, if I choose to use v11.2.0.1006 would I need to re-mod my bios to v11? And is it really worth the effort?
Is this correct?
I changed the drivers to 11.2.0.1006 in the image on both the main WIM and the setup WIM after converting the main image to a WIN, the image is now around 500mb larger. Also stupid question, but there is there only one version of 11.2.0.1006 that works for all chipsets?
For the bios I have flashed to 11.2.0.1527, although not sure what EFI IRST RAID for SATA is, does it matter?
The correct names of the Win10 image files are install.wim (main image) and boot.wim (image just for the Win10 Setup). Maybe the NTLite GUI shows them with another name.
EDIT: To avoid misunderstandings by the visitors of this Forum I have customized resp. specified the thread title.
We have the same issue, and in our case, the troubleshooting tool hangs. The "VM status" and "User permissions" checks return "OK" quickly, but the "Network status" check never returns - not even a timeout error. We have made no changes since the last successful access a few weeks ago, except to add a person to the team, and now access fails for everyone.
How can we verify that the transfer mechanism is working correctly? It could be failing to transfer the metadata, or it could be storing them on the VM instance with the wrong permissions (in general, not restrictive enough, which will cause the sshd server to ignore the information.)
This second possibility seems likely, as 3rd party tools (PuTTY, MobaXterm, ssh client on Ubuntu box) all fail with "permission denied (public key)". (This was after setting up a ssh key in the metadata as per the instructions for enabling 3rd party tools.)
This issue recently started affecting me as well. (I'm getting the same "Code: 1006" error.) The default allow ssh rule is in place for my network. SSH via IAP tunneling is working for some of my VMs, but not for others. The only difference I can see between the VMs for which it's not working and the VMs for which it is working is that the not-working VMs are members of backend groups (connected to a backend load balancer). I can't think of any reason that that would contribute to this issue, but I figured I'd mention it.
I see "Network Connectivity Test Result: REACHABLE"; the report mentions that it was able to deliver a packet to destination port 22, and it mentions the firewall rule that allowed it. Nevertheless, I am not able to ssh to the machine via SSH-in-browser nor gcloud command.
I had the same problem yesterday. The solution was to create an Image with the latest VM Snapshot and then I had to delete the VM and create it again with this Image. It was the only way that I found to make it work.
I had this happen to me a few times. I eventually figured out that my boot disk was full. There was no disk space for the keys that are automatically transferred at the beginning of the SSH session. I've seen a specific error message for this issue before, not sure why it's not shown in this case.
I have the same problem. I tried the solution suggestions above. Result is zero. But your solution might solve my problem too i thing. But i don't know how to use terminal and how to manage my server via terminal. Can you help me please?
Replace "VenKat!@3" with your desired password for root. Make sure that Serial Console connection is enabled for the VM. Now click on Connect Serial Console and wait for the VM to connect, A blank Screen will be there, Press enter multiple times to see the Login Prompt. Give "root" as ID and for password provide the password which you created in the above steps. Now you will be able to access the VM. Ping me if you have doubts on this.
I've been facing this issue for last couple of days. I would, however, try to find the issues though user permissions, N/w status and VM status all are ok and tried the various logics eventually, no luck. Could you please provide me a workaround for it because its a quite hectic tasks as creating new VM's inevitable where consume alot of time. Thanks in advance
I also faced this issue when restarting my VM instance and accessing it, I used to update the in-built firewall rules using UFW command while using it and couldn't access the session after restarting the instance. I stopped meddling with UFW commands, since then I haven't faced this issue even after multiple restarts.
If you use IP mode of internal for App Engine Flexible (i.e. there is no external IP address), then SSH currently does not work. I realize this discussion is for Compute Engine, but just in case the readers were interested in SSH to an App Engine Flexible VM.
7fc3f7cf58