Re: [Cooker] Why ext3fs is a default fs, not ReiserFS?
vendredi, le 11 octobre, 2002 18h21, Todd Lyons a écrit: > Dave Fluri wrote on Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 12:35:03AM -0400 : > > I've never had a lick of trouble with either ext3 or ReiserFS. After a > > couple of years of trouble-free use of ReiserFS, I installed Debian on > > this same machine. I wanted to share a partition between Mandrake and > > Debian. At the time, Debian did not support ReiserFS but it did support > > ext3, so I switched my shared partition to ext3. No worries since. Never > > even so much as a hint of trouble, and I live in a rural area with > > frequent power interruptions and disturbances. > > For reference, what hard drives do you have (Make and Model) and what > type of controller and is it running at udma speeds? > > Blue skies... Todd hda = Quantum Fireball CX20.4A (20 GB) -- this used to have a Reiser partition but now is #/sbin/fdisk -l /dev/hda Disk /dev/hda: 240 heads, 63 sectors, 2637 cylinders Units = cylinders of 15120 * 512 bytes Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System /dev/hda1 1 511 3863128+ b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda2 * 512 514 22680 83 Linux /dev/hda3 515 2637 16049880f Win95 Ext'd (LBA) /dev/hda5 515 1045 4014328+ b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda6 1046 1576 4014328+ b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda7 1577 2107 4014328+ b Win95 FAT32 /dev/hda8 2108 2637 4006768+ b Win95 FAT32 hdb = Maxtor 94091U8 (40 GB) -- looks like this #/sbin/fdisk -l /dev/hdb Warning: deleting partitions after 16 Disk /dev/hdb: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 4865 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes Device BootStart EndBlocks Id System /dev/hdb1 * 1 590 4739143+ c Win95 FAT32 (LBA) /dev/hdb2 591 765 1405687+ c Win95 FAT32 (LBA) /dev/hdb3 766 4865 32933250 85 Linux extended (type 85) /dev/hdb5 766 842618471 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb6 843 1607 6144831 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb7 1608 1684618471 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb8 1685 1939 2048256 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb9 1940 2194 2048256 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb10 2195 2245409626 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb11 2246 2278265041 82 Linux swap /dev/hdb12 2279 2408 1044193+ 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb13 2409 3172 6136798+ 83 Linux ReiserFS /dev/hdb14 3173 3248610438+ 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb15 3249 3502 2040223+ 83 Linux ext3 /dev/hdb16 3503 3756 2040223+ 83 Linux ext3 fdisk, for some reason, won't show the last three partitions on that disk. The end of that SHOULD indicate /dev/hdb17 392 MB ext3, /dev/hdb18 6.1 GB ext2, /dev/hdb10 1019 MB ext3 and /dev/hdb20 at 1004 MB as ext3. Mandrake 8.1 (2.4.8-26mdk), Debian 2.2r5 and Mandrake 8.2, soon to be replaced with final. The more stable of these two Mandrake distros (for me) is definitely 8.1. 8.1 is as stable as Debian with the 2.2 series kernel and almost as stable as Solaris on Alpha or VMS on Alpha). 8.2 is probably stable enough but there's not enough value above 8.1 to make me want to migrate all my stuff. We'll see about 9.0. The box also has Win98SE to keep Diablo running for my teenage son :-) All partitions are working fine and visible under the appropriate system to the extent that would be expected. That is to say, FAT32 partitions are visible from any OS. ext2 and ext3 visible from all Linuxes. ReiserFS visible only to Mandrake (i.e. not to Debian with stock 2.2.5 kernel.) VIA Apollo IDE controller on the PCI bus, Model VT82C586 Running at UDMA 33., limited by the Quantum disk. Anyway, that's probably more info than you wanted. Dave
Re: [Cooker] Why ext3fs is a default fs, not ReiserFS?
jeudi. le 10 octobre 10, 2002 04h12, Per ?yvind Karlsen a écrit: > ReiserFS is still not to be trusted.. > I have experienced this for myself and alot of other people are > complaining too... > > oh well, back to work*sigh* > > Aleksander Adamowski wrote: > > In the 9.0 installer, during the "Setup filesystem" stage, when you > > create a new partition, by default its filesystem type is tset to ext3fs. > > > > Now I have to tell all the newbie converts that install Linux to > > manually change it to ReiserFS, because it is a more advanced filesystem. > > After all, ext3 is just ext2 with a journal strapped-on. ReiserFS is a > > new vision to filesystem design. And it is faster. > > > > If they just used the defaults, they'd probably be disappointed with > > Linux "because it it slower than my Windows". Yes, ext2 and ext3 are > > slower than FAT16/32. > > > > So what do you think about changing the default FS type to Reiser in > > mdk9.1? I've never had a lick of trouble with either ext3 or ReiserFS. After a couple of years of trouble-free use of ReiserFS, I installed Debian on this same machine. I wanted to share a partition between Mandrake and Debian. At the time, Debian did not support ReiserFS but it did support ext3, so I switched my shared partition to ext3. No worries since. Never even so much as a hint of trouble, and I live in a rural area with frequent power interruptions and disturbances. Dave
Re: [Cooker] MakeCD problems: Warly, do you have a workaround?
mardi, le 08 octobre, 2002 06h19, Leon Brooks a écrit: > On Tuesday 08 October 2002 03:15 am, Warly wrote: > > Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> On Friday 04 October 2002 01:47 am, Warly wrote: > >> > >> I found at least one reason for the ISO not being created: > >>> /mnt/disk/cooker//misc//parsehdlist: error while loading shared > >>> libraries: librpm-4.0.4.so: cannot open shared object file: No \ such > >>> file or directory > >> > >> Yes. And, AS I POSTED HERE EARLIER ON THIS TOPIC, if you point > >> LD_LIBRARY_PATH at the directory containing that library, everything > >> else on 8.2, stuff like `less' and `cat', dies. > >> > >> Do you have a workaround? > > > > I do not understand your problem. > > MakeCD doesn't work on an 8.2 system. If I download Cooker (or 9.0) onto an > 8.2 system and do a MakeCD, it does because it cannot find the librpm-4.0.4 > libraries which are part of cooker/9.0. If I define LD_LIBRARY_PATH to > include the directory with those libraries, everything else in that shell > session dies, including some system utilities necessary for making the CDs. > > Cheers; Leon I have a very similar problem in trying to build the ISOs on an 8.1 system but I get a "Permission denied" error on ldlinux.so.2 when running as root. Dave
Re: [Cooker] devfsd.conf
mardi, le 01 octobre, 2002 01h38, Peter Polman a écrit: > On Monday 30 Sep 2002 2:04 pm, Biagio Lucini wrote: > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Now that 9.0 is out ... > > > > > > Minor spelling corrections in English version. > > > > > > > > > Initialize not initialise > > > Minimize not minimise > > > Maximize not maximise > > > > Did you say English or American? :-) > > > > Biagio > > Hopefully English ... > > We Canadians tend to speak a little of both though! > I have seen initialisation and initialization but not initialise (I know it > doesn't make sense, but ...) > I have never seen minimise or maximise. Are these supposed to be English or > American spellings? Well, let me initialise my comments by minimising what Peter has said. I am one Canadian who uses initialise and minimise all the time. I like them that way. They are widely accepted and can be found in any good dictionary. Please don't change... Dave
Re: [Cooker] About MandrakeExpert
le Mardi Mars 05, 2002 08h15, vous avez écrit : > Disclaimer: I just forward this message. I have never used > MandrakeExpert and cannot comment on it altogether. > > === > > LeHardi wrote: > > Is this MandrakeExpert accesible for all or only for people who have > > bought boxed version of MDK. I'm asking because I have Downloaded > > Edition (on 3 CD-ROMs), and some months ago, I've registered at > > MandrakeExpert. I,ve read that (in FAQ): > > " How much does it cost ? > > Anyone can ask a question and receive an answer for free! > > (Optional) > > If you wish, you can choose to pay for support, in which case, we > > guarantee a response in a given timeframe. See 'Payment system' below > > for more details." > > I purchased the boxed edition of Mandrake 8.1. I am also a member of > MandrakeClub. > > That being said, it has been my experience that asking a question on > MandrakeExpert is a complete waste of time.You will get a much more > satisfying response by asking the family dog. > > > So it worked in the beginning, I was asking questions and getting > > answers for free. I didn't want (and still don't want) support for > > money, because I've got a lot of time for waiting;-)). But now > > Mandrake > > > Expert doesn't work for me since some time: I can 'create incident', > > next choose 'Community Support' but when I press tab 'Select Experts' > > there is no experts in the table!. So it's logical that I can't get > > help > > > from any of the Experts, it seems do not work even in Public incident > > mode. So is this any way to get free 'community' support at > > MandrakeExpert. Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I don't what? Or > > maybe MandrakeSoft makes me to use only payable support? I sent e-mail > > to MandrakeExpert but didn't get any response. > > I'd give up on MandrakeExpert. I am (have been) an expert at MandrakeExpert. It's sort of silly to admit this but I got involved to win a stupid t-shirt that fits my son and does not fit me. I think incentives are very important. I have, literally, answered THOUSANDS of questions on MandrakeExpert and I have three or four t-shirts that, as I said, fit my son. I stopped answering questions, essentially, around the middle of January. At that time, I had been No 2 for two months. Since December, I have seen nor heard nothing from Mandrakesoft. They say that they will pay us for support but it's hard to figure. If anyone should have received some money it's dakota (marc) or me. I can't speak for dakota but I know I've never even heard a thing from Mandrake. I've installed Debian on my box... I still have and use Mandrake but I'm doing it without expectation of recompense. Perhaps I was misguided to expect otherwise... Dave Fluri North Bay, Ontario Canada
Re: [Cooker] Aurora crash at boot
Le mercredi 19 décembre, 2001, Chuck a écrit : > Indeed. > Aurora is unneeded, hides useful boot-time system messages, > and is oft broken. So why not ->CAN-IT<- once and for all? I'm so happy to hear that I am not alone in my assessment. I've often wondered precisely WHY we have Aurora. What purpose does it serve? I, certainly, can find none. Dave
