Linux-Setup Digest #31, Volume #20 Mon, 13 Nov 00 17:13:09 EST
Contents:
free RAM and out of memory? (Harald van Pee)
Re: Oracle 8i on RH Linux 7.0 (Scott Schaefer)
S L O W ftp load (Jason Wagner)
Re: Linuxiso.org: How to create a bootable CD? (Frederic Faure)
Re: Memory leak? (Greg Engel)
Re: Memory leak? (Greg Engel)
Re: Memory leak? (Greg Engel)
Re: Memory leak?
ssh error; connection refused ("Yavin")
Re: Where should I put .so ? (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E8re=5FOrph=E9e?=)
Re: Memory leak? (Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4h=E4ri?=)
Re: Machines do not power off after RH7 upgrade ("Mark")
Re: Memory leak? ("ne...")
Re: S L O W ftp load ("ne...")
Re: How do you record setting during setup? (Scott Rainaldo)
Bad Hard Drive? ("Adam H.")
Re: Memory leak? (Greg Engel)
Re: Windows/Linux : Disk size issue ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: Windows/Linux : Disk size issue ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: Which distro for old(486SX 6MB) firewall (Scott Rainaldo)
scsi pcmcia? (Jason Wagner)
Re: S L O W ftp load (Jason Wagner)
Re: WINE, VMware, Willows TWIN, etc. vs. Dual Booting (robert w hall)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Harald van Pee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: free RAM and out of memory?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:17:31 +0100
Hi,
I use SuSE 7.0 (2.2.16 Kernel with SuSE patches),
asus a7v board with 1.5 GByte RAM,
1.5 GByte swap space.
My program needs about 1 GB of memory, so with the standard Kernel
Linux have to swap a lot.
So I have set the parameters
CONFIG_2GB=y
CONFIG_BIGMEM=y
and make a new Kernel image.
Now Linux uses the whole RAM, but I always get out of memory!
Nothing else have changed!
Where is the problem?
The following C++ program allocates (close to) the maximum memory I can
get
#include <iostream.h>
#include <iomanip.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <limits.h>
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
void *p;
{p = new int [356900000L];
}
cout << p << endl;
exit(EXIT_SUCCESS);
}
why can I not allocate at least (close to) 2 GByte of memory?
And why can I alloc 440000000 integers on a machine with 384 MByte,
1.5Gbyte swap and standard Kernel?
Thanks
Harald
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:33:53 -0500
From: Scott Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Oracle 8i on RH Linux 7.0
And if you read my first reply in this chain, you will get your
answer ....
This is a known problem on RedHat 7.x; Oracle installs and runs
w/o problem on Redhat 6.x [assuming you meet minimum sys requirements,
esp. memory] ... there may be workaraounds/fixed for v7.0 by now; see
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18391
Lamar Thomas wrote:
>
> I am using the "Oracle 8i for Linux Starter Kit" book and the Oracle CD that
> came with the book. I have read good things about the book on "Amazon.com".
> There is also an "Oracle 8i for NT Starter kit".
>
> However, that is where I got my error: "Initializing Database" (see my
> first post in this chain).
>
> Lamar
>
> "Marco Shaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:p4lP5.2904$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yes:
> >
> > 1. otn.oracle.com where you can get a free account, and continue from
> there.
> > 2. Buy the Oracle Press/Osborne book: Oracle 8i for Linux Starter Kit to
> get
> > the CD.
> >
> > Marco
> >
> > "Doug Holtz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:3a0d859e$0$99041$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Where can I get Oracle for Linux? Is there a free download version?
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: Jason Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: S L O W ftp load
Date: 13 Nov 2000 19:57:27 GMT
Greets all.
I have an IBM Thinkpad 600X that I'd like to put RH7.0 on. I've got a
Win2k machine acting as an ftp server. From another linux box on my local
100mb segment, I get 4.2e+02 KBytes/sec from the Win2k machine when using
ftp. Yet, monitoring the Win2k machine's output, the laptop linux install
is taking data at a rate of about 500 BYTES ever 8-10 seconds. At this
rate we'll have a new president before my install finishes....
What gives? I've seen this before ( slow ftp linux loads ) but never
slower than my oldest analog modem....
Thanks!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frederic Faure)
Subject: Re: Linuxiso.org: How to create a bootable CD?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 19:55:43 GMT
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 21:11:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rod
Smith) wrote:
>Depending upon where you
>got the image file, my guess is that somebody created one that wasn't
>bootable, or there may be a compatibility problem between the software
>used to create the bootable image and your BIOS. (I've seen BIOSes that
>wouldn't boot bootable CD-Rs that booted fine on other computers, but
>that would boot other bootable CD-Rs.)
That could well be a non-bootable CD, but I know so little at this
point...
>Your best bet at this point is to
>simply create a boot floppy from the appropriate floppy image on the
>CD-R and boot using that. That'll be **MUCH** less hassle than trying to
>figure out what went wrong or downloading a different image file from
>another source.
Indeed. I'll give it a try.
Your help was much appreciated !
FF.
------------------------------
From: Greg Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:56:16 -0500
k wrote:
> have you tried using a _stable_ kernel?
>
This bothered me too, but our network makes heavy use of autofs, and that
seems to be much better under the 2.4 kernel than the 2.216+ (especially
when home dirs are automounted).
I do recognize that it's poor form to whine about problems with development
software. If it's a kernel bug, I'll be quiet. What concerns me more is
if it isn't!
-Greg
------------------------------
From: Greg Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:54:04 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On a per process basis, gtop will show memory usage.
gtop shows the total size of all resident processes to be about 113MB (that's
reasonable), but top still shows 227 MB used, 13MB buffered, 28MB free and 133MB
cached.
Am I being silly here? Do these numbers make sense? Another person emailed me
and talked a bit about the cached memory. If what I'm seeing is normal
behavior, I apologize for the waste of bandwidth. Again, I'd appreciate your
insight.
-Greg
------------------------------
From: Greg Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:58:55 -0500
Andreas Kähäri wrote:
> Is this a real memory leak or are you viewing "buffered" and "cached"
> memory as "unavailable"?
top shows the following:
> 2:56pm up 23:18, 5 users, load average: 0.10, 0.05, 0.15
> 77 processes: 76 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU0 states: 1.3% user, 1.2% system, 0.0% nice, 96.3% idle
> CPU1 states: 2.0% user, 0.4% system, 0.0% nice, 97.0% idle
> Mem: 255312K av, 227232K used, 28080K free, 0K shrd, 13920K
> buff
> Swap: 248996K av, 12K used, 248984K free 133448K
> cached
It's the "Mem used" section that was bothering me as it steadily grows from
72MB up to this 230MB value that you see here. Perhaps I'm just watching
my cache fill up?
-Greg
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:06:25 GMT
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:54:04 -0500, Greg Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>On a per process basis, gtop will show memory usage.
>
>gtop shows the total size of all resident processes to be about 113MB (that's
>reasonable), but top still shows 227 MB used, 13MB buffered, 28MB free and 133MB
>cached.
>
>Am I being silly here? Do these numbers make sense? Another person emailed me
>and talked a bit about the cached memory. If what I'm seeing is normal
>behavior, I apologize for the waste of bandwidth. Again, I'd appreciate your
>insight.
Switch gtop to show virtual sizes so that the amount of a process that is
swapped out won't mess up the numbers.
------------------------------
From: "Yavin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: ssh error; connection refused
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 13:11:39 -0700
Anyone know where I can start looking why I can ssh to 127.0.0.1 but if
I ssh from outside of inside to my actual internet ip it says connection
refused? Thanx
--Scott
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E8re=5FOrph=E9e?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where should I put .so ?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:09:51 +0100
:o/ I did *not*
Huw Lynes wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> =3D?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=3DE8re=3D5FOrph=3DE9e?=3D <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
wrote:
> > I have a driver (.so) for WACOM Artpad II, I put it /usr/lib it didnt=
> > work so I moved it to /lib
> > it didnt work eather Where should I move it?
> >
> > --
> > Lex legis
> > Organisation pour un monde plus optionnel
> >
> > En ce moment
> > Orph=3DE9e - Johanne
> > http://www.491.org/projets/mmm/rphee-jo
> >
>
> Just checking, but you did run ldconfig after you had installed the new=
> library didn't you?
>
> Huw Lynes
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Lex legis
Organisation pour un monde plus optionnel
En ce moment
Orph=E9e - Johanne
http://www.491.org/projets/mmm/rphee-jo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4h=E4ri?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: 13 Nov 2000 21:13:08 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Engel wrote:
>Andreas Kähäri wrote:
>
>> Is this a real memory leak or are you viewing "buffered" and "cached"
>> memory as "unavailable"?
>
>top shows the following:
>
>> 2:56pm up 23:18, 5 users, load average: 0.10, 0.05, 0.15
>> 77 processes: 76 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
>> CPU0 states: 1.3% user, 1.2% system, 0.0% nice, 96.3% idle
>> CPU1 states: 2.0% user, 0.4% system, 0.0% nice, 97.0% idle
>> Mem: 255312K av, 227232K used, 28080K free, 0K shrd, 13920K
>> buff
>> Swap: 248996K av, 12K used, 248984K free 133448K
>> cached
>
>It's the "Mem used" section that was bothering me as it steadily grows from
>72MB up to this 230MB value that you see here. Perhaps I'm just watching
>my cache fill up?
>
>-Greg
>
As I expected, you should add those 13920K+133448K to your mental
picture of the approx. amount of memory being available for use (that
makes it approx. 175448K free and 79864K used as it is in the
screenshot above).
Maybe if you think of it like this: "28080K free" means 28080K is just
wasted.
/A
ps: Why is the shared memory at 0? It ought to be higher... Are you
using a test/hacked kernel?
--
Andreas Kähäri, Uppsala University, Sweden (until 1:st of Dec. 2000)
========================================================================
"If you leave now, you're going to miss the real experience."
-- Richard M. Stallman, Stockholm 1986. Visit www.gnu.org
------------------------------
From: "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Machines do not power off after RH7 upgrade
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:27:41 +0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rithban" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> >> > Upgraded RH6.2->RH7.0+updates but when you shut down a machine, it
>> >> > does not automatically turn the power off any more.
> [...]
>> Does your bios support this function?
>
> Yes. It was working just fine before I upgraded from RedHat 6.2 to
> RedHat 7.0 (with updates). This is on an ASUS K7V with the latest BIOS
> update.
There is a patch that will fix this problem. I had the same thing happen
and the patch does work :-).
Go to RedHat.com and click on Support then RedHat Updates and install
everything for RH7.0.. BUT DO NOT INSTALL THE NEW GNORPM ! If you install
the GnoRPM patch you will no longer be able to use GnoRPM. Keep the
GnoRPM version that came with RH7.0 ..
Guzzo
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
From: "ne..." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:51:11 GMT
On Nov 13, 2000 at 14:58, Greg Engel eloquently wrote:
>Andreas Kähäri wrote:
>
>> Is this a real memory leak or are you viewing "buffered" and "cached"
>> memory as "unavailable"?
>
>top shows the following:
>
>> 2:56pm up 23:18, 5 users, load average: 0.10, 0.05, 0.15
>> 77 processes: 76 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
>> CPU0 states: 1.3% user, 1.2% system, 0.0% nice, 96.3% idle
>> CPU1 states: 2.0% user, 0.4% system, 0.0% nice, 97.0% idle
>> Mem: 255312K av, 227232K used, 28080K free, 0K shrd, 13920K
>> buff
>> Swap: 248996K av, 12K used, 248984K free 133448K
>> cached
>
>It's the "Mem used" section that was bothering me as it steadily grows from
>72MB up to this 230MB value that you see here. Perhaps I'm just watching
>my cache fill up?
There's nothing wrong. When you boot the system and start
using programs, they get loaded into memory until all memory
is used up. Then swap gets used. This is why if you load, close
and reload an app, the reload is quite fast. As it is, it seems
your system is trying to make good use of it's ram and still has
some way to go.
--
Registered Linux User # 125653 (http://counter.li.org)
Pretend to spank me -- I'm a pseudo-masochist!
3:46pm up 22 days, 23:37, 10 users, load average: 0.09, 0.10, 0.05
------------------------------
From: "ne..." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: S L O W ftp load
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:53:21 GMT
On Nov 13, 2000 at 19:57, Jason Wagner eloquently wrote:
>Greets all.
>
>I have an IBM Thinkpad 600X that I'd like to put RH7.0 on. I've got a
>Win2k machine acting as an ftp server. From another linux box on my local
>100mb segment, I get 4.2e+02 KBytes/sec from the Win2k machine when using
>ftp. Yet, monitoring the Win2k machine's output, the laptop linux install
>is taking data at a rate of about 500 BYTES ever 8-10 seconds. At this
>rate we'll have a new president before my install finishes....
>
>What gives? I've seen this before ( slow ftp linux loads ) but never
>slower than my oldest analog modem....
Did you initialize the swap?
--
Registered Linux User # 125653 (http://counter.li.org)
That's life.
What's life?
A magazine.
How much does it cost?
Two-fifty.
I only have a dollar.
That's life.
3:52pm up 22 days, 23:44, 10 users, load average: 0.00, 0.03, 0.03
------------------------------
From: Scott Rainaldo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How do you record setting during setup?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:54:48 -0600
I believe that by default Mandrake puts a few installation log files in
the /root directory. Is this what you're looking for?
Peter wrote:
> Is it possible to have Mandrake or similar distros record all the
> settings and options selected during setup so they can then be
> inserted in to documentation for future setups?
>
> The information recorded would have to be in a form that related to
> the setup screens so a subsequent worker can read the setup
> documentation and see exactly what to click at each screen.
>
> Lists of changes to individual configuration files would not help if
> they were set up by an option like "workstation".
------------------------------
From: "Adam H." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Bad Hard Drive?
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:30:03 +1100
Hi,
I've got a Linux Box. (RH 6.2) setup as a SAMBA server in an office here.
Every now and then I get the following message appear on the
screen:
linux kernal: hda: status error: status=0x58 { DriveReady SeekComplete
DataRequest }
linux kernal: hda: drive not ready for command
linux kernal: ide0: reset: success
Can anyone please shed some light on this problem? Have I got a bad HDD? Is
the data stored on the HDD at a high risk?
Thanks In Advance...
Adam
------------------------------
From: Greg Engel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Memory leak?
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 16:16:54 -0500
Many thanks to those of you who responded -- I'm relieved to see that I was
just missing the boat. ...and it's nice to have a better understanding of
the inner workings of this thing to boot.
Sincerely,
Greg Engel
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,linux.redhat.install,uk.comp.os.linux,uklinux.help.newbies
Subject: Re: Windows/Linux : Disk size issue
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 23:16:41 +0000
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <F0xP5.6404$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris
Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>
>Richard Senior <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8ultl6$cq3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 11 Nov 2000, Chris Jones wrote:
>>
>> > I wish to install linux (redhat) as a dual boot option on a machine
>> > currently running windows98 only. I need to increase the disk space to
>do
>> > this so would like to replace the current 1Gig disk with a somewhat
>larger
>> > one (20Gig or so). Now, I suspect my machine may suffer from the 8.4 Gig
>> > 1024 cylinder limit BIOS issue which would effect windows but not I
>gather
>> > linux.
>>
>> Replace? Have you considered adding the second disk on the secondary IDE
>> channel (/dev/hdc), setting your CDROM as a slave to one of the disks if
>> necessary (/dev/hdb or /dev/hdd). You could then leave the smaller disk
>> dedicated to Windows (no re-installation required!), following advice in
>> other posts regarding the /boot partition for Linux.
>
>Yes, that certainly is an option I could follow. I was though trying to
>explore the replace option since if it is possible I would like to put
>windows on the new disk since a) I really need more than 1Gig there - its
>already pretty full and b) the new disk will be faster (whether its faster
>in my machine is another question). However, thanks for your suggestion.
>
>Following the first (replace) option another possible question has occured
>to me. I would have to partition my disk to place c:\windows and possibly
>\boot below the 1024 limit and the rest of linux above. However, if my bios
>cannot read above 1024 how will I partition the disk correctly here ? Can
>fdisk do this in this case or will I need to use some other partitioning
>tool ?
>
On my old PC (QDI Explorer 2) I used windows to create the first
partition (1 gig) for NT, then used linux fdisk thereafter.
Unfortunately I had to use the doze fdisk to start because while linux
would happily recognise and use the geometry doze set up, if linux set
the first drive up doze couldn't recognise what was going on.
And don't worry about doze being unable to handle the disk. The original
95 iirc can't handle disks over 8gig; but I'm running OSR2 which is
convinced I've got an 8gig drive and is quite happy with the 9gig
extended partition on that said drive (I've got 3 1gig primary
partitions, too).
I've got several friends for whom I've kept their 1gig windows drive.
Just create a "d:\program files", and install all your programs in
there, reserving the c: drive solely for windows itself (so many progs
insist on stuffing bits into \windows\system or \windows\system32 but
1gig should be plenty). Also move windows swap to d: to free more space
on c:
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved in. "Let
me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,linux.redhat.install,uk.comp.os.linux,uklinux.help.newbies
Subject: Re: Windows/Linux : Disk size issue
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 23:19:40 +0000
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <8umrt1$fsb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard Senior <richard@r-
senior.demon.co.uk> writes
>On 12 Nov 2000, Chris Jones wrote:
>
>
>I tend to play safe when creating partitions and use DOS fdisk for Windows
>and Linux fdisk for Linux. Others may have had success in creating Windows
>partitions with Linux fdisk?
>
Just make sure you do a "dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hdxn bs=512 count=1"
before you let doze format anywhere near it.
Format will believe the data at the start of the partition in preference
to the partition table if it looks valid. So if you create a 1gig
partition and the garbage fools windows into thinking it's 2gig - bye-
bye the next partition on the disk :-(
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Witches are curious by definition and inquisitive by nature. She moved in. "Let
me through. I'm a nosey person.", she said, employing both elbows.
Maskerade : (c) 1995 Terry Pratchett
------------------------------
From: Scott Rainaldo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which distro for old(486SX 6MB) firewall
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 15:43:39 -0600
Sorry, the previous message was sent using my work address, but I am the same
person that sent the original question.
Scott Rainaldo wrote:
> I have never used/installed OpenBSD, but this may be a good reason to try it
> out. However, I have a few questions:
>
> * Will the setup for the net installer allow you to send a hostname to the
> DHCP server for authentication? I cannot get a connection without this
> option.
>
> * Will OpenBSD allow me to have a private network behind the firewall,
> sharing the one internet connection? Is that what IP forwarding is for?
>
> * How difficult is it to set up? I am not a network guru by any stretch of
> the imagination.
>
> Please excuse my ignorance as I have only setup one linux machine for this
> purpose before and it didn't work very well. Thanks.
>
> cfish wrote:
>
> > I did one on a pent 100. OpenBSD took about 60 megs of space. very
> > good secure firewall. it was a net based install.
> >
> > On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 04:11:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >Hi everybody. I recently purchased an old PC for use as a linux
> > >firewall/IP forwarding. Here are the specs:
> > >
> > >Processor: 486SX
> > >Memory: 6MB
> > >Hard Drive: 130MB
> > >NIC: 3COM ISA Etherlink III
> > >NO CD-ROM
> > >
> > >I was wondering which distribution would be easiest to install with this
> > >
> > >setup? I want as minimal a setup as I can possibly get (ONLY
> > >firewalling/IP forwarding). Is this even feasible with this hardware?
> > >
> > >I could not get a RedHat 6.1 boot floppy to boot. I was able to get a
> > >Redhat 5.1 floppy to boot, but I want a newer setup than this. I was
> > >thinking of trying to temporarily install my DVD-ROM (from my current
> > >desktop) into this machine to install from, but was unsure if a machine
> > >this old would recognize it as a CD-ROM. Suggestions anyone?
> > >
> > >Thanks in advance!
> > >
> > >Scott
> > >
> > >
> > >
------------------------------
From: Jason Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: scsi pcmcia?
Date: 13 Nov 2000 22:07:30 GMT
well, the ide controller on my laptop is kaput. how good is linux at
recognizing pcmcia scsi cards? i'd still like to use this laptop, but it
looks like i'll need an external scsi drive to do it.
thanks!
jason
------------------------------
From: Jason Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: S L O W ftp load
Date: 13 Nov 2000 22:09:07 GMT
: >What gives? I've seen this before ( slow ftp linux loads ) but never
: >slower than my oldest analog modem....
: Did you initialize the swap?
well, i just kept clicking "ok" through all of the default rh setup stuff,
applying custom settings only where they were needed -- i tried to do as
vanilla a load as possible. consider win2k won't even load on this
machine, and nt thrashes the disk something fierce, i've decided its the
ide controller ( not surprising on this model laptop ) and am opting
( hoping? ) to go scsi.
------------------------------
From: robert w hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: WINE, VMware, Willows TWIN, etc. vs. Dual Booting
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 21:58:18 +0000
In article <8upd1v$9c1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>OK - After coming to the conclusion I will still NEED Word'97 for my
>dissertation and such for at least 6 months of work I have options:
>
>On the laptop I am about to get (3gig HD, 32 Mb RAM, P 233Mh Compaq
>Armada 1592) I can either make it dual boot: ~2.2 Gig Linux & ~700 Mb
>Win95 or use WINE or other Windows emulator to install Word & Excel on
>(moving to MySQL from Access - yes!!! :-)
>
>I see having two OSes as a real waste of space (although Win95 can
>install in just about 110Mb on my desktop) and do not want to bother
>doing everything twice and having to reboot, etc.
>
>So:
>Why do people dual boot when there are emulators? From my searches, it
>does seem they are a slower then the 'real thing'. How noticable on
>the Word '97 front? I do not play games, and hence this is entirely a
>non-issue.
Ah right in my element. I think your options are wine, win4lin, vmware.
cost:- wine is free, win4lin is $39 (but there is a 15 day demo),
vmware is $99 (but there is a 30 day demo).
resource:- wine runs OK in 32Mb, as does win4lin - I've run both happily
on smaller machines eg 24Mb DX4-100s. vmware needs 96Mb minimum and
moans if the cpu is slower than 266MHz
Test comparisons (made on a 112Mb 686-M2-300) for details track down the
post I made some months ago, but in outline:-
On a maths-intensive calc (runge-kutta integration of heat transfer
equations) all 3 ran at the same speed-ish.
On a database rebuild problem (news group data base in Turnpike, about
35,000 entries) wine performed rather poorly (6 minutes IIRC) - this is
due to the use of a socket-protocol to communicate with a separate
'wineserver' module for file-handling; and from memory, real win96 takes
75 secs, win4lin tales 90s and vmware took about 2m 30s .
In look & feel, wine can feel a bit flakey and draws windows rather
slowly - vmware also feels sluggish on a 300MHz machine; but win4lin
does have a real windows-look-and-feel to it.
VmWare does have its fun side - because it's a fairly complete virtual
machine, you can do kinky things like starting off a windows session,
dropping into dos and bringing up linux via loadlin...
The wine _developers_ swear by it....
Go try em all ( but I now stick with wine and win4lin)
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
robert w hall
using TP4.02 under wine
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.setup) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Setup Digest
******************************
