RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
LM7.2 is a "Full-Featured" release. There are tons of things in there that you probably will never use (drivers, alternatives to other applications, etc), thus the size of the download. Want a small release (not LM)? Try "Peanut Linux" from http://www.ibiblio.org/peanut/ . It's a 50MB download, and less than 150MB installed. Kinda short on drivers, but if you have common stuff or don't mind finding a driver or two, give it a try. It even offers a method of installing on a DOS partition (ran great on my meager laptop!). Rather than a "lighter OS", I would describe Linux as a "more flexible OS". You can put together a tiny OS for a server or older machine and have it only run in console and it will fit on a floppy . Or, you can put together a huge release that includes drivers for just about everything, tons of apps and window managers, and a great installer and have it take 4 CDs (LM7.2 Complete). Depends on what YOU want to do. Check the "Distribution Watch" at Linux Planet (http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/). There are TONS of flavors out there! -Carlton -Original Message- From: David and Alicia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download size. How much disk space will a bare install need? David and Alicia Would mandrake run on a p60, 540 mb hd, ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Revenant Sent: 29 December 2000 10:24 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] basic question Define "faster than windows". Using KDE I've noticed there is quite often a noticable delay waiting for windows to appear - far longer than in windows. Herman Christiani wrote: > Hi, > Yes, you can and it will run faster then windows, > but you forgot to mention the amount of ram? > Linux likes it's ram, the more the better. > On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, you wrote: > > Dear all, > > Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? > > will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? > > David and Alicia Society Design Mailing List http://www.egroups.com/group/Society_Design For any and all aspects of designing societies, from discussion of real- world utopian ideas to fantastic fictional or roleplaying worlds. ---Revenant [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] --
RE: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please
Nice summation Paul! -Carlton -Original Message- From: Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 4:58 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] Why use linux at all? - not heresy, just want a straight answer please > ok, here is the real question: why do people try running linux?, the > impression i had gathered was that it was a lighter os and could be used on > older machines, (i386 etc). I was a little dismayed when i saw the download > size. How much disk space will a bare install need? > > David and Alicia Hi, Most people that 'try' running linux have probably not read enough about it to know what is possible and how to do it. Millions of people run Linux and are happy with it. Progress is made in all areas, in the development of linux, Windows, and hardware. If the hardware gets more potent, then the OS's of that timeframe will grow along with that. You can indeed run Linux on a 386, but you can not expect to take all the advantages of the new OS-technology using old hardware-technology. Mandrake is optimized for Pentium class processors, not i386. Redhat is compiled for i386, and when you use RH5.2 (from which, if I am not mistaken, Mandrake originated) or RH6.0, that will run nicely on an I386. You can not install everything, but a basic system with some Xwindow support should be possible on your specs of i386 with 540mb. Even with 8 megs of RAM, this should function. (Not 'run', but 'walk'.) Compare what you need for a basic mandrake installation with a bare Xwindow system, and windows95, and you may not find much difference. Using Linux made me microsoft independent, free of blue screens of death, DLL's in all forms and shapes and versions, an uninterpretable registry file, and the power to influence the system and repair it when it breaks down. Windows does not let me do that. If you seek the ease of windows, being taken by the hand by wizards which make all the decisions for you, then windows is what you want. If you want to be able to use your computer by what you put in it yourself, then you can go with Linux. (My expression of thoughts entirely of course.) Paul
RE: [newbie] basic question
No shame in that! I just installed LM7.2 on my P-75, 40MB RAM, 700MB HD laptop! Ran the default install routine, and it pared it down (cut options) to fit my drive. I think you should have room for a pretty good install. Heck, I got 4 window managers on my tiny drive! Will it run apps faster? Sure! BUT... Not your Windows (There! I said it!) apps. Even my P75 zips along through the stuff I've played with. Give it a try! What have you got to lose! -Carlton -Original Message- From: David and Alicia [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[newbie] basic question Dear all, Can i install mandrake on my (shame) p200mmx 3.3gig machine? will it run apps faster than windoze bloatware? David and Alicia
[newbie] Screen distortion in X
Well, Santa was nice and brought me a copy of LM7.2 (Wal-Mart version). The install went VERY well on my P75/40MB RAM/700MB HD Texas Instruments laptop. The only problem I have is horizontal distortion lines on my screen, about 10 pixels apart. They appear to just shift the line about 5 pixels left. I assume this is a frequency problem, but I'm not sure what to change. I selected the generic LCD panel 640x480 monitor and the appropriate video card (Cirrus, not sure which, but it was the last card in the Cirrus list, and was the one in my laptop manual). Works great, I just hate the distortion. Anyone got a fix? TIA -Carlton
RE: [newbie] Need xf86config help
And I thought I was alone in this...! I thought my problem was because I had to use "Peanut Linux" due to the limitations of my old laptop: P-75@90 700MB HD 40MB RAM 640x480 LCD can only use either CD OR FDD not both, and CD-ROM drive is not bootable so I can't do LM! I go through XF86Setup, and set the display to 640x480 VGA, and the mode to 640x480, and everything goes fine until I startx. Startx errors out saying that 640x480 is not a valid mode, removes it from the list, then says there are no valid modes, so it quits. I've looked for an LCD setting, but the selections are limited. This is probably an older version of Linux. Is there a way to add more options to the XF86Setup monitor selection? -Carlton -Original Message- From: Joseph Burden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 5:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] Need xf86config help Hey... I'm having a similar problem with my Compaq Presario 12XL325 laptop. I just upgraded from MK 6.0 to 7.2 and the monitor will not configure correctly. It will work fine for the install but not with any of the GUI's. If you can get any information, could you send it to me? If I get any info, I will send it your way. Thanx! >From: Spoonman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [newbie] Need xf86config help >Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 15:22:16 -0500 (EST) > >Hi all, >I just upgraded from MK 6.1 to MK 7.2. >I wasn't paying attention during the install/upgrade portion >and did a fresh install, which wasn't so bad except... >I'm running on a laptop. >TOshiba Tecra 730XCDT which I had previously wrestled into 1024x768x16bpp. >Now I can't seem to get the monitor to a higher resolution than >640x480x8bpp. >Anyone out there have any advice, or maybe a xf86config I can take a look >at? > >Wishdiak >+Ferris Saves+ >www.wishdiak.com > > _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
RE: [newbie] zip drive
Seems all Zips are technically SCSI. The parallel version uses a SCSI emulation, probably the same case with USB. -Carlton -Original Message- From: Goldenpi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 12:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] zip drive I cant tell you about the usb drives, but the parallel zips are scsi. I dont know how but both bindows and linux see them as scsi. - Original Message - From: "Bob Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 9:38 PM Subject: [newbie] zip drive > Hi all, > > I have a dell inspiron 3700 pIII 450mhz, I installed ver 7.2 and everything > worked fine. When I installed linux I had my usb iomega zip drive installed. > During the installation the os found the zip drive, and installed the folder > in the mount folder. But when I go to it, it has a lock on it. I went into > gtkzip, and it shows the zip drive as having a scsi connection. Even though > it found it as a usb drive during install. > > When the computer boots up, it loads the usb stuff fine, with no errors. > > Any help would be appreciated > > Bob >
RE: [newbie] New to list
"Look, if you two kids can't play nicely together I'm going to have to separate you." --My mom, 30 years ago -Original Message- From: Rolf Pedersen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 7:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] New to list fred banana wrote: > get a grip you all, or I will send my neighbor over to BUST A CAP IN YA. YOU > FIGURE OUT THE TYPE OF CAP YOU WANT. Brave words, banana, for someone who has to run to his neighbor to get the job done. Do what you have to do, just spare me your stupid bitch life story :-D Rolf Pedersen
RE: [newbie] 7.2
Philomena, Could you please not list the specs of your system? The drool is terrible for my keyboard... -Original Message- From: philomena [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2000 6:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] 7.2 I downloaded the 7.2 iso images and had no problem at all with the install - I had all kinds of problems with 7.1 - wasn't stable or reliable for me at all. My specs are: 1Gz Athlon, 384 mgs RAM, 40 gb drive, SBLive! sound, NVidia GEforce 256 video, princeton flatscreen monitor, external 3COM dsl modem, internal zip and CDRW, HP Deskjet 950C 7.2 detected and configured all successfully - the first time that has happened to me with any distro, and I've tried versions of quite a few. So, in my book, 7.2 is great. - my 2cents cheers, philomena On Sunday 05 November 2000 05:53 pm, you wrote: > I've been hearing alot about problems galore installing > this or that...in v7.2 of Mandrake. > What seems to be the problem with this version...hum? > > Should I just go out a buy 7.1 cause that one seems > to be more stable and reliable...etc. ??? > > It looks like 7.2 has too many bugs in ite?
RE: [newbie] Windows
You are all arguing with a CHILD! Take a look at his web site (mentioned in one of his first posts). He has posted his picture there. He is a young boy, complete with a messy room, who has a bit of knowledge but no wisdom. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 1:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] Windows hey i right books and i create many things but you want to know what if i post them on the internet i am going to have to expect one person buys it and then redistributes it to their friends and then thier friends and so on. if you sell it in a store same concept, do you think i am going to buy 50 copys of win2k for my whole familys list of computers, no why not just copy one. and presto the whole family is up to date, this is really getting old, and all because i mentioned a nit picky detail to let someone know hey you may not have to format your whole drive because you are using linux and want to add windows, i found i didnt have too but that may be contributed to my copy of windows. so all of you whining about oh hes using pirated stuff hes so bad, go ahead call the cops, really this is pathetic. maybe i just grew up in the oldschool of computing where hacking and pirating was a comon thing. but ohwell i will continue my way despite new international laws and blah blah freakin dah can we get back to the topics now of gee i have linux but it doesnt work quite right hey haow about you can you help?
RE: [newbie] Windows
It doesn’t matter if anyone’s “making money” from your piracy. The copyright holder is losing money since you are using an unlicensed copy for free. Pirating software is a crime, no matter if it’s friends “sharing” a program or a business selling illegal copies. I’m all for free distribution of software. That’s why I like the ideas behind Linux so much. I may not agree with some laws, but they are still the laws and we should abide by them until we can change them. …Sorry, I’m afraid that was more like my FOUR cents… I’ll get off my soapbox now. CJD -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 10:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [newbie] Windows In a message dated 02-Nov-00 04:47:33 Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's not exactly something I'd announce on a public mailing list. who in here supports microshaft making money??? with crapy software!! besides they would have to do some serious searching to find me. and although ms has lots of money everyone i know pirates that stuff, if it is worth pirating, no ones making money, i dont have a tech manual that comes with the software, so last i checked it was still legal. it all depends on how you do things
RE: [newbie] question about mandrake probs..
I'm a very-newbie, but the command is kill and the Process IDentification argument is the number listed to the left of the offending process when you type "top". So, if the CPU hog was listed as process 17, you would type: kill 17 Someone correct me if I am leading this poor soul astray... -Carlton -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 30, 2000 3:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] question about mandrake probs.. In a message dated 30-Oct-00 16:30:14 Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > kill the_PID_of_the_program i think you should find a better way of quoting commands because that just confuses me should i based on this type kill the_pid? or could it be kill pid believe it or not some people get lost if you post extra comments into the command string, and spend more time on trial and error
RE: [newbie] FAT partitions
FIPS worked well for me when I was repartitioning my meager 700MB drive on my laptop to accept "Peanut" Linux. As I recall, it was pretty straight forward. The key to not loosing DO$ information is to scandisk and defrag (to move everything to the start of the partition), then IMMEDIATELY reboot with the floppy and use FIPS before anything gets written to the end of the partition. -Original Message- From: Xavier Chitnis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 5:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[newbie] FAT partitions Hi, I am attempting my first installation of Mandrake 7.1 and have hit a problem. I burned the ISO files to CD, and boot from the installation CD. I am asked to select my language etc. However, when I get to the disk partition stage, it says my partition table is too corrupted to be read. If I select Automatic partitioning, it doesn't seem to realise there is a FAT partition that needs to be resized. I have run disk defragmenter and scandisk prior to attempting installation. I am trying to install onto a PC with Windows 98SE, and it is a 10Gb hard drive. Would I be better to try to resize the partition using something like fips (not that I've ever used it...)? I would be very grateful for any advice or suggestions Xavier
RE: [newbie] Windows 98 Defrag and Linux Partitions
On the other hand... Norton's System Works has some good utilities. Seems to find and fix more problems in M$ than Scandisk, defrag, etc. -Original Message- From: Øyvind Bjørkelund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 3:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] Windows 98 Defrag and Linux Partitions NEVER, I Say NEVER, run Scandisk. It makes more errors than i fixes. If your PC is going slow, format the drive or delete the partition, and install Linux again!! Microsoft Scandisk should NEVER have been invented..! - Original Message - From: "DataChannel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 5:05 PM Subject: Re: [newbie] Windows 98 Defrag and Linux Partitions > If defrag finds any errors during the scandisk-like mode of it (first 5%) it > wouldn't let me continue. I ran scandisk before running defrag and it > didn't do anything to my linux partition because I rebooted to linux to make > sure it still works and it worked after scandisk was run and there were no > errors in scandisk. > > Defrag is supposed to only defragment files within the partition, why does > it go as far as wiping my linux partition and screwing up the partition > table to do it? > > Even if I disable its check for errors and program optimizer, it ends up > destroying the linux partition when run. > > What does defrag need to do to other partitions to get its job done on the > windows partition anyways and WHY? > > - Original Message - > From: "Ed Tharp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 8:58 AM > Subject: Re: [newbie] Windows 98 Defrag and Linux Partitions > > > > maybe the defrag is running scandisk, and auto settings are set to repair > > the boot sector? > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Larry Marshall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 8:54 AM > > Subject: Re: [newbie] Windows 98 Defrag and Linux Partitions > > > > > > > > > > > Why is it that everytime I defrag in windows (in safe mode) that it > > results > > > > in screwing up my linux partition and making my computer unbootable > > because > > > > grub can't read the linux partition? > > > > > > Maybe you're setting your defrag tool to do an entire disk rather than > > > just the Windows partition. OTher than that, I have no idea > > > > > > > > > > > > _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
RE: [newbie] Install problems
I haven't even got my install going properly yet, so this may be WAY off base but: Is that 2GB you have left set as a partition (eg: using Fdisk), or just left as unallocated area? Wouldn't the system miss unallocated space (therefore the "No valid devices..." error)? As I said, probably NOT the solution, but the reply might help me learn. -Carlton -Original Message- From: Tom Brinkman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 7:45 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] Install problems On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, you wrote: > The ATA/66 is on the board, no card. I have an ABIT BX6 II for my > MoBo. Last night I got past the SCSI error and found this error at > the HD detection phase of the install: > "An error has occured- > No valid devices were found on which to create new file systems. > Please check your hardware for the cause of this problem." > But here's the deal. I have already installed Win98se on this HD > and have over 2gigs left for Linux. What is this all about? It's almost assuredly a hardware/config defienciency. Try a bios setting to change to ata/33, or simply replace the ata/66 IDE cable with an ata/33 cable and see if that doesn't solve the problem. I suspect Windoze works with it because it's more tolerant of marginal hardware than Linux is. After/if that change to ata/33 works, then try going back to ata/66 (tho it's hardly worth it IMNSHO). IIRC, there's some problems with Abit and ata/66. To the point that Abit even released their own Linux distro (Gentus?) to overcome it. -- Tom Brinkman[EMAIL PROTECTED] Galveston Bay
RE: [newbie] uninstalling linux mandrake.
I just found "Peanut" Linux installation that claims to need less than 200MB for install. Maybe it's not too late to keep Linux. The readme file says there's an option to overwrite larger installations. Does anyone have experience with Peanut? It looks like just what I've been looking for to install on my meager laptop. How is it for a very new (read as: "virginal") newbie? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 8:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[newbie] uninstalling linux mandrake. ok, ok, ok So 500 MB wasn't enough partition space to make a properly working Linux Mandrake without eventually crashing. I learn from these things. [: As I result, I'm trying to uninstall the linux partition and put all back to the original state. I want to get rid of the LILO boot and slide the 500 MB back into my Win95 partition where I need it until I upgrade from my ghetto-style 4 GB HDD. I ran the "uninstall Linux parition" program. It said it was removed and everything... Strangely, my computer still goes to LILO, then linux boots (unless, of course I type in "dos"). Win95 says my 3.75GB (practically 4GB) HDD is 2.6GB, so the partition is obviously still there... ANY help would be greatly appreciated. (=
RE: [newbie]
I believe that’s ”Amiga” made by Commodore a while ago. I would be interested as well, as I have an old one in my garage! Carlton J “Doc” Dodd -Original Message- From: emerhawk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 3:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [newbie] I'm asking for a frend. Is there a dist. for an amega machine. Emerhawk
RE: [newbie] Re: FW: How can I install LM 7.0 to laptop?
A... THERE's the problem! This laptop has one drive bay. That means I can use the floppy drive OR the CD-ROM (so I can't boot from floppy and use the CD). Any way to write enough to the hard drive to allow a shut down and re-boot so I can switch to CD? Carlton J "Doc" Dodd, MSgt, USAF Independent Duty Medical Technician Superintendent, Commander's Staff 726th Air Control Squadron (208) 828-3604 (DSN) 728-3604 -Original Message- From: Mark Weaver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [newbie] Re: FW: How can I install LM 7.0 to laptop? Carlton, Since you're installing Mandrake and your machine only has 700MB of total space you won't have sufficient space for a dual boot machine. In fact, you may find it a bit tight squeezing Mandrake on there. However, a workstation install should fit. To install with an older CDROM shouldn't be too hard. If you've got an Micro$oft CDROM setup disk lying around that will work wonderfully. If you don't just email me and I'll zip you one up and send it to you. That will allow you to boot your machine with the floppy and hopefuly load the CDROM drivers to get the whole process started. If that doesn't work you make have to make a boot floppy with the CDROM boot.img and try booting with that. Those iamges should be on the Mandrake installation CD's. -- Mark /* I never worry about the to-jams. * Once I've stuck my foot in my mouth * it's already too late...just make sure * you chew them thoroughly before swallowing! */ Registered Linux user #182496 * Pine 4.21 * On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 7:54pm ,Carlton Dodd spake passionately in a message: > > > (Second sending, Hoping to catch someone's attention who's done this) > > Anyone have any work-arounds to install LM 7.0 on a laptop? > > I have an old Texas Instruments P75 laptop with 40MB RAM and a 700MB HDD. > > > I have two questions: > > 1. Is this laptop sufficient for running Linux? With a GUI? > I will devote the system completely to Linux if I need to, but I'd love > to be able to run a dual-boot if there's enough space so I can learn that > as well. > > 2. How do I actually install from the CD? > Unfortunately, I cannot simply boot from the CD like you can on newer > machines. The install instructions say to just make a boot floppy and > then install from the CD, but my laptop only allows me to install one > drive (CD or Floppy) at a time. And I have to shut off the machine in > between. Can I make a floppy that will install enough so I can shut > down, swap to the CD drive, and go from there? > > Thanks for any help you can give, > Carlton > > > YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! > Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! > Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. > >
RE: [newbie] OOPS Maybe a better & safer way
You just did... Carlton J "Doc" Dodd, MSgt, USAF Independent Duty Medical Technician Superintendent, Commander's Staff 726th Air Control Squadron (208) 828-3604 (DSN) 728-3604 -Original Message- From: ai4a [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 4:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:[newbie] OOPS Maybe a better & safer way After thoughts on my problem when I stopped too many daemons. I am using Mandrake 7.0 here. This is the only linux I have ever seen so all comments are about this distro. Maybe a better & safer way to stop daemons would be: During boot press 'I' to enter interactive mode. Any daemon that I wish to stop just answer 'NO' when the system asks if I wish to start it. If everything works OK then wonderful. If the system fails, just reboot. After I determine which daemons I can do without, then I can use DrakeConf to stop them. Thanks to all who helped me. This is a wonderful way to share knowledge. I hope one day to be able to contribute. Have a nice day Charles
