Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > Atleast you finally decided to check the hardware :) I always did and never complained about this one. jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Friday 17 February 2006 05:56, jdd wrote: > no. it was not the main concern - coted only to give the > hole thing. In fact an other pcmcia cd works, so the problem > is probably a hardware problem and I wont bother the driver > programmer for an obsolete hardware. *cough* *cough* Atleast you finally decided to check the hardware :) > jdd Josep[h M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
scsijon wrote: > you saw my note in another message on pcmcia ramcards i take it yes. but the problem is not making this particular pc to work, but making the larger possible numberr of pc work, so it's desirable to know what the ram limit is. when installed, the system works. install should not be the bottleneck :-( jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
At 09:56 PM 17/02/2006, you wrote: scsijon wrote: > At 10:52 PM 15/02/2006, you wrote: >> configuring the pcmcia, but not completely so I can't read >> the cd and need to copy the cd content to the hard drive. > > Jean-Daniel, have you tried to contact the driver's creator via > Freshmeat no. it was not the main concern - coted only to give the hole thing. In fact an other pcmcia cd works, so the problem is probably a hardware problem and I wont bother the driver programmer for an obsolete hardware. i'd still give them a go, you'd be suprised how much " out of date" hardware there is out there and they are looking for bugs. i know, I let a old scsi card's maintainer about a problem i was having and by looking at that part of the code she solved a problem she had been tracing for three months without sucess. and of course I work in console mode (no graphic needed at all). same here for most systems i prefer console and don't even install x one of the problems I had (I still work :-) is probably than when making the partitioning of the disk it's probably not possible to use any swap (seems logical), so yast is bounded to the physical ram. you saw my note in another message on pcmcia ramcards i take it regards scsijon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
scsijon wrote: > At 10:52 PM 15/02/2006, you wrote: >> configuring the pcmcia, but not completely so I can't read >> the cd and need to copy the cd content to the hard drive. > > Jean-Daniel, have you tried to contact the driver's creator via > Freshmeat no. it was not the main concern - coted only to give the hole thing. In fact an other pcmcia cd works, so the problem is probably a hardware problem and I wont bother the driver programmer for an obsolete hardware. and of course I work in console mode (no graphic needed at all). one of the problems I had (I still work :-) is probably than when making the partitioning of the disk it's probably not possible to use any swap (seems logical), so yast is bounded to the physical ram. more later :-) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
At 10:52 PM 15/02/2006, you wrote: Pascal Bleser wrote: >> 10.0 is significantly faster but crashes in the same area, cut this install tools is configuring the pcmcia, but not completely so I can't read the cd and need to copy the cd content to the hard drive. Jean-Daniel, have you tried to contact the driver's creator via Freshmeat or whichever link they are using? Often they are after feedback like this problem from you to help them refine the driver. The alternates are maybe they have a version that is modified to handle your laptop's interface chips. or you need to have a postcode (drivername --postcode) to have it work for your laptops setup. There are some pcmcia's that have been "cloned" by using other devices in strange combinations, they work so-so but not for eveything. regards scsijon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
At 01:17 AM 16/02/2006, you wrote: cut > +1 YaST rules but YaST is *Big_n_Fat* ;-) It makes the whole thing, each release, *far* too hangry with new hardware power to my point of view too! all my updates are done in a window set as init3 (text mode), not that fat and a lot less resources. scsijon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 19:12, Pascal Bleser wrote: > Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: > >>> Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > >>> You can't have a single distro that does everything > >> > >> why not :-). > > > > Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a > > variety of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of > > a turtle with 3 broken legs. > > ROFL > > Now *that's* a quote ;) And I would like to point out Debian's new standard wallpaper: http://www.kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=35372 Couldn't resist :) Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
well. it was pretty tricky but I manage to get a functional 10.0 on my tiny box :-) even Windowmaker runs well I have still to understand why the pcmcia cdrom don't works from install, this would be much more handy, but secondary. I will also try SUPER. However it seems that there is no more "minimal" version? I'll stop this thread now and will see the result on a wiki page in the near future thanks jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
I've got a little better now. found the alt F9 console in linuxrc to test memory I did the following, monitoring the process from aF9 and aF2 unplug all what was not strictly necessary (cd, net, even mouse and floppy-all but the AC plug :-) lauch install. directly from the copied cd (no need to have two linux.initrd, the /boot/loader ones are nice) in linuxrc (the small text interface we know for ages), remove all the unwanted modules (pcmcia, usb, scsi...) the 77Mo of physical ram are just no enough for the system to rum. approx 15Mb cached in swap. total activated swap : 2x200Mo for a total of 400Mo. most stay free. only text install expert partitionning->y give a 2Gb partition to yast. Yast insists to have a third swap (?) I let it go. a little dependency problem to solve manually (in yast) and the instal runs. so total 550Mb swap 35Mo used when I look at it (but may be much more at some times). to be continued :-) Rules SUSE!!! I hope anybody understand I try to push SUSE Linux on it's edge, not for default use :-) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Carlos E. R. wrote: > He is thinking of "image" meaning "photos" or "graphics". A language > translation missunderstanding. yes and no :-). yes in the first place, I don't see a kernel as an image (for me if not a picture an image is a disk), but then no, because it's possible to have a much smaller kernel, with only the basics: ide HDD, VGA at least in the start. jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Carlos E. R. wrote: > I installed a SuSE 6.x on a 386SX, 5Mb ram - just to prove myself it is > possible. The installer would certainly not run, I know, I tried the same :-) but I simply took the HD > to another computer, and installed it there. it's a good solution, if applicable. here I have a 2" laptop disk and no connecting device, but I could use this solution if no other can be foun (the needed hardware is cheap and can be loaned) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-02-15 at 18:49 +0100, jdd wrote: ... > once installed, the console / yast version runs quite well > on a mush less demanding system than the one advertised on > the box. (-we should have an idea of the true limits to > advertise them on the wiki). > > It seems than the install moment is crucial. If you pass the > install, so far so good. I installed a SuSE 6.x on a 386SX, 5Mb ram - just to prove myself it is possible. The installer would certainly not run, but I simply took the HD to another computer, and installed it there. I was simply carefull with the HD position in the bus, and choosing a kernel. It booted, but it was slow. I went back to the second computer, recompiled the kernel for a 386 - - then it run a bit faster. Probably you can do something similar with your hardware and SuSE 10. Other people might not have a good computer for this approach, though. Another idea would be some program that allowed a remote install, but the installer running in your local computer and installing in the remote one, simply copying files, and perhaps running tests when told so. Does yast have that posibility? I never tried, but? Would that be possible? I guess it would need less memory. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFD88tQtTMYHG2NR9URAgXfAKCCpxOrLAJIfE53odmTtuERenDqYACdHr1W Tye+S92kA43e8JB2tz3xym4= =Z+hz -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-02-15 at 15:54 -0500, Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 15:23, jdd wrote: > > > As more things get added to the kernel, it gets bigger. More hardware > > > support, mor filesystems, etc, etc, etc. Thus, the kernel image (among > > > other things) are larger. > > > > oh, these images. yes. and most of this stuff is unusefull > > at install time. > > The kernel isn't useful when installing? Hardware support isn't useful when > installing? You want to specify hardware now, remove detection? He is thinking of "image" meaning "photos" or "graphics". A language translation missunderstanding. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFD88hRtTMYHG2NR9URAiTAAJsGJvXeNxpjpnR1+MDoAxxdBzwKOQCfeFwd VG0Opd9xP0R6Mvie11H5P3g= =nAxn -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: >>> Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: >>> You can't have a single distro that does everything >> why not :-). > > Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a variety > of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of a turtle > with 3 broken legs. ROFL Now *that's* a quote ;) - -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _\_v The more things change, the more they stay insane. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD88NRr3NMWliFcXcRArrtAKCNZxSEf+43JNizSg8xn+IjWnfL/ACgrGz9 wdJ2N70eCJLp/XEBpU/lOdI= =u7mF -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 15:23, jdd wrote: > > Need and want are two different things. I haven't used a floppy in years > > (yes, years), despite having them in every machine (except the tablet, > > for obvious reasons). > > let us work progressively. If I can make a very minimal > install work, I will se what are exactly the requirements > and what I can do with it Go for it > > As more things get added to the kernel, it gets bigger. More hardware > > support, mor filesystems, etc, etc, etc. Thus, the kernel image (among > > other things) are larger. > > oh, these images. yes. and most of this stuff is unusefull > at install time. The kernel isn't useful when installing? Hardware support isn't useful when installing? You want to specify hardware now, remove detection? > > Except its not fdisk, its a front end for fdisk to make things easier. > > I don't know anything easier than fdisk for disk > partitioning. and for that sake, partitoning can be done > _before_ any install, why bother during install? Because I don't have to bother doing it before the install, I can just do it when I'm installing. That makes things easier. > > I use > > fdisk fairly often, and I don't remember every number to coincide with > > the filesystem type. Why should I? > > just a good question: none. fdisk has nothing to do with > filesystem. I used the wrong word, that would be my mistake. I meant system id. However, that said, I can partition, set the system ID, and format during install, why would I want to add an extra step by using fdisk separately? > > If you are not in a hurry? Of course I am, why would I do something on a > > computer thats slower than doing it by hand? Its a tool, and you use the > > right one for the job. > > I used for ages very old computer as web server/gateway > (usually the one nobody wants), I keep the big one for my > desktop. Considering SUSE has way more than what you'd need for a simple web server/gateway, again Why use SUSE for this at all? > and don't forget we are not alone in the wordl and I sent > from time to time to Africa hardware nobody wan't here and > they like. they also deserve help. And they are also working on the specialized distro for the OLPC project, tweaking it to work well with the meager hardware being provided. So again, why does SUSE need to do this? It isn't what the distro is intended for. > > I don't know that there is a problem with the install, like I said, you > > should really test your hardware. > > please have some confidence. I have a SUSE 9.1 perfectly > running on this machine from a year now. so the machines runs. Some confidence in what, the hardware? I don't, its old. Old hardware breaks. In order to come up with a solution, you need to properly define a problem. You haven't. > > you experience a crash, and have given no further information. > > it's very difficult to have infos at boot time. SUSE is good > enough. I have console outputs: quiets. only no more input > and the drive light blinking slowly for hours... when > usually I have an answer in less than 20 seconds. You also mentioned a gentoo machine building KDE for 16 hours... is KDE broken too? You are making a guess, plain and simple. A guess really isn't defining a problem, its stating what you think a problem could possibly be. > and this is not a first time problem. As an other writer > said we have this problem with nearly any new SUSE... I > remember me.. (too long a story) That memory and cpu requirements go up with every new release? We went over this already. > > Still need to define this "problem" > > why an regular encrease of memory usage day after day, and > no luck with swap. somewhere somebody allocates for memory? > what kind of memory don't swap... a very short answer can be > very informative I'm sorry... I don't understand what you're trying to say here. > > Because theres enough stuff most people don't use on the CD/DVD as is. > > People don't want to download 5 CD's, if you keep adding things to the > > list, do you think people would be happy about downloading 3 DVD's > > because its a more comprehensive installation system for every possible > > configuration? > > no need to be on the regular cd, ftp is nice. You're missing my point. You've created a "problem", and believe the solution is additional yast development, and more packages. What about other "problems" (I put this in quote because as I said, you have yet to actually define a problem, and I don't mean haphazard guesses), do they need to be added to the CD's, on the ftp, in a repo, onto the DVD, etc, etc. Where does it end? I would like to reiterate that if you believe an "alternate" version of SUSE should be made, then go right ahead and do it. However, this obviously is not the goal of SUSE to run on VERY old hardware, so I couldn't possibly see any developer without a personal interest in playing with an old machine bothering to dedicate
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: >> as stated in an other post, for a minimal install we need >> only grub (on floppy) and hard drive access For ide drives >> it's very easy. nearly any video card runs console... > > Need and want are two different things. I haven't used a floppy in years > (yes, years), despite having them in every machine (except the tablet, for > obvious reasons). let us work progressively. If I can make a very minimal install work, I will se what are exactly the requirements and what I can do with it > As more things get added to the kernel, it gets bigger. More hardware > support, mor filesystems, etc, etc, etc. Thus, the kernel image (among other > things) are larger. oh, these images. yes. and most of this stuff is unusefull at install time. > Except its not fdisk, its a front end for fdisk to make things easier. I don't know anything easier than fdisk for disk partitioning. and for that sake, partitoning can be done _before_ any install, why bother during install? I use > fdisk fairly often, and I don't remember every number to coincide with the > filesystem type. Why should I? just a good question: none. fdisk has nothing to do with filesystem. > If you are not in a hurry? Of course I am, why would I do something on a > computer thats slower than doing it by hand? Its a tool, and you use the > right one for the job. I used for ages very old computer as web server/gateway (usually the one nobody wants), I keep the big one for my desktop. and don't forget we are not alone in the wordl and I sent from time to time to Africa hardware nobody wan't here and they like. they also deserve help. > I don't know that there is a problem with the install, like I said, you > should > really test your hardware. please have some confidence. I have a SUSE 9.1 perfectly running on this machine from a year now. so the machines runs. > you experience a crash, and have given no further information. it's very difficult to have infos at boot time. SUSE is good enough. I have console outputs: quiets. only no more input and the drive light blinking slowly for hours... when usually I have an answer in less than 20 seconds. and this is not a first time problem. As an other writer said we have this problem with nearly any new SUSE... I remember me.. (too long a story) > Still need to define this "problem" why an regular encrease of memory usage day after day, and no luck with swap. somewhere somebody allocates for memory? what kind of memory don't swap... a very short answer can be very informative > Because theres enough stuff most people don't use on the CD/DVD as is. > People > don't want to download 5 CD's, if you keep adding things to the list, do you > think people would be happy about downloading 3 DVD's because its a more > comprehensive installation system for every possible configuration? no need to be on the regular cd, ftp is nice. > Grab the source, modify as you please. some sources are very easy to change, some are not. the owner knows for sure. it's often very difficult to figure just looking at. jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 14:15, jdd wrote: > Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > > Rewrite... no. A decent amount of effort, sure. As I mentioned, you > > could lighten the install process by modifying and releasing a "light" > > SUSE 10, replacing YaST (at installation) with one of the other > > installers available. Maybe you'd remove KDE and GNOME, and have XFCE, or > > even Ratpoison. Whatever. > > but there, why not, if there no other choice. there are > other flavors of opensuse on the wiki, why not this one. But > of course I won't do this alone, so if no other solution if > found, will see Those other flavors you mention, I'm assuming you mean Super and such? They are exactly what I've mentioned - a customized version of SUSE, done by a member of the community. > > An updated installer that detects a great number more hardware types, > > larger images to be copied, a more complete and usable "expert" options, > > etc, etc, > > well, at least usefull notes. > > hardware: > > as stated in an other post, for a minimal install we need > only grub (on floppy) and hard drive access For ide drives > it's very easy. nearly any video card runs console... Need and want are two different things. I haven't used a floppy in years (yes, years), despite having them in every machine (except the tablet, for obvious reasons). > don't forget it's only the first bootable install that need > to be achieved at this point. > > large images? don't see what. As more things get added to the kernel, it gets bigger. More hardware support, mor filesystems, etc, etc, etc. Thus, the kernel image (among other things) are larger. > expert options ? any small disk allows me to make fdisk > works and it's enough. Except its not fdisk, its a front end for fdisk to make things easier. I use fdisk fairly often, and I don't remember every number to coincide with the filesystem type. Why should I? A drop down menu in the GUI does things nicely for me, I don't want to use a more basic fdisk setup. > > And I have an AMD 800 with (now) 256mb ram, running 10.0 beautifully. So > > whats the problem? > > if things goes this way, it may not run 10.1 (9.3 asked > 128Mo, 10.0 256, 10.1?) (hope it's not :-))) don't flame :-) Not really. Again, those requirements are for use with the standard full GUI install. I know KDE or GNOME is going to be heavy, but I also know I can install it, it will run (slow as hell, but it runs), and then I can tweak and do what I need to trim it down. If I really want it light, I'd just do the most basic install, no GUI, and grab srpm's and compile what I want, how I want it, and lighten the load that way. > > I really don't see the problem here - the hardware you're talking about > > isn't "older" or "aging", its honestly damn near ancient. > > what is the matter? this harware is perfectly working, even > with kde if you are not to in a hurry, even openoffice!! > (not that I recommend that) If you are not in a hurry? Of course I am, why would I do something on a computer thats slower than doing it by hand? Its a tool, and you use the right one for the job. > ands it's free, why trow it only for an install problem. I don't know that there is a problem with the install, like I said, you should really test your hardware. You're claiming it uses too much memory because you experience a crash, and have given no further information. I don't really know that there even is an install problem, so I won't even touch that idea unless you tell me that you tested your hardware, you've checked to see how much ram is in use by the installer, found a memory leak, whatever. Until then, your claim that the installer is too memory intensive really is meaningless. I don't say that to be nasty, I say it because its true. > well. > > the problem is now well defined. we must seek for solutions. Is it? You honestly haven't convinced me of anything yet other than you had a problem installing on old hardware, and have not done any follow up to figure out why it crashed. If you have, you haven't forwarded this information to the list. So I'm going to go with "forty two" as the answer. > I would be very gratefull to the yast team if somebody could > say what changes in the new yast gives problems; Still need to define this "problem" > not so long time ago we had yast and yast2 > > why not a yast and yast3 for the new things? Because theres enough stuff most people don't use on the CD/DVD as is. People don't want to download 5 CD's, if you keep adding things to the list, do you think people would be happy about downloading 3 DVD's because its a more comprehensive installation system for every possible configuration? > could a very simple subset for minimal install be given to > the community. In short, is it possible for a very casual > programmer to take yast source and compile a simplified one > or is this completely impossible? Grab the source, modify as you please. > thanks
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: >>> Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: >>> You can't have a single distro that does everything >> why not :-). > > Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a variety > of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of a turtle > with 3 broken legs. Debian is the opposite side :-). I run also a gentoo on an HPPA computer - terrible (more than 15 days and kde not yet compiled :-) - > Rewrite... no. A decent amount of effort, sure. As I mentioned, you could > lighten the install process by modifying and releasing a "light" SUSE 10, > replacing YaST (at installation) with one of the other installers available. > Maybe you'd remove KDE and GNOME, and have XFCE, or even Ratpoison. > Whatever. but there, why not, if there no other choice. there are other flavors of opensuse on the wiki, why not this one. But of course I won't do this alone, so if no other solution if found, will see > An updated installer that detects a great number more hardware types, larger > images to be copied, a more complete and usable "expert" options, etc, etc, well, at least usefull notes. hardware: as stated in an other post, for a minimal install we need only grub (on floppy) and hard drive access For ide drives it's very easy. nearly any video card runs console... don't forget it's only the first bootable install that need to be achieved at this point. large images? don't see what. expert options ? any small disk allows me to make fdisk works and it's enough. > And I have an AMD 800 with (now) 256mb ram, running 10.0 beautifully. So > whats the problem? if things goes this way, it may not run 10.1 (9.3 asked 128Mo, 10.0 256, 10.1?) (hope it's not :-))) don't flame :-) > I really don't see the problem here - the hardware you're talking about isn't > "older" or "aging", its honestly damn near ancient. what is the matter? this harware is perfectly working, even with kde if you are not to in a hurry, even openoffice!! (not that I recommend that) ands it's free, why trow it only for an install problem. well. the problem is now well defined. we must seek for solutions. I would be very gratefull to the yast team if somebody could say what changes in the new yast gives problems; not so long time ago we had yast and yast2 why not a yast and yast3 for the new things? could a very simple subset for minimal install be given to the community. In short, is it possible for a very casual programmer to take yast source and compile a simplified one or is this completely impossible? thanks jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:39, Kenneth Schneider wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 13:34 -0500, Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: > > >>Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > > >> You can't have a single distro that does everything > > > > > >why not :-). > > > > Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a > > variety of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of > > a turtle with 3 broken legs. > > Ahh. I see you missed the smiley. We know it isn't practical or > economical for one distro to support -all- of the platforms out there. > Now if you know someone with a few 100 million $ they want to contribute > to the cause perhaps something could be done. > > :-) Well with the paragraph following that comment, I don't think jdd considers it impractical at all. And if I knew someone with a few hundred million... I'd be at home right now playing with all my toys, instead of working :) Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 13:34 -0500, Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: > >>Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > >> You can't have a single distro that does everything > > > >why not :-). > > Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a variety > of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of a turtle > with 3 broken legs. > Ahh. I see you missed the smiley. We know it isn't practical or economical for one distro to support -all- of the platforms out there. Now if you know someone with a few 100 million $ they want to contribute to the cause perhaps something could be done. :-) -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 13:18, jdd wrote: >>Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: >> You can't have a single distro that does everything > >why not :-). Because it isn't practical. Look at Debian... its stable, works on a variety of platforms and development is racing along at the speed of a turtle with 3 broken legs. >of course if it would need a complete rewrite, it would not >be possible. Rewrite... no. A decent amount of effort, sure. As I mentioned, you could lighten the install process by modifying and releasing a "light" SUSE 10, replacing YaST (at installation) with one of the other installers available. Maybe you'd remove KDE and GNOME, and have XFCE, or even Ratpoison. Whatever. >however I feel like there is little to do. After all the >SUSE 9.1 runs on the test machine, what have 10.0 to don't? An updated installer that detects a great number more hardware types, larger images to be copied, a more complete and usable "expert" options, etc, etc, etc. So alot. >there are much more such computers available now than was >before (Linux on a low end 486 always was difficult), much >more customers we should not let go :-) > >jdd :-) And I have an AMD 800 with (now) 256mb ram, running 10.0 beautifully. So whats the problem? I also have a Dell laptop with a p4 1.4, a p4 2.4 workstation, an AMD 700, a dual p500 server, and a 500mhz celeron tablet. All are running SUSE 10, with no problem whatsoever. I really don't see the problem here - the hardware you're talking about isn't "older" or "aging", its honestly damn near ancient. Soon, it'll be about as useful as the KayPro 4 luggable in my basement, and that thing cost $4000 USD back in the day. It was the ultimate business tool at the time... does that make it useful now? Hell no. Its old, and worthless, except as a (very, very large and heavy) keepsake. Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Hello, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: By having an uncompressed rootimage directly on CD, you might save quite a bit of memory during installation. A first rough estimate would be 60 MB less which could be quite noticeable on older hardware. I could be wrong on this. However, this makes it impossible to switch CDs before reboot. Would not be a problem. There is a reboot when the first CD is over. But I guess, it's compressed due to space limitations... Bye, -- CzP http://peter.czanik.hu/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > You can't have a single distro that does everything why not :-). of course if it would need a complete rewrite, it would not be possible. however I feel like there is little to do. After all the SUSE 9.1 runs on the test machine, what have 10.0 to don't? there are much more such computers available now than was before (Linux on a low end 486 always was difficult), much more customers we should not let go :-) jdd :-) -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
jdd schrieb: > once installed, the console / yast version runs quite well > on a mush less demanding system than the one advertised on > the box. (-we should have an idea of the true limits to > advertise them on the wiki). > > It seems than the install moment is crucial. If you pass the > install, so far so good. By having an uncompressed rootimage directly on CD, you might save quite a bit of memory during installation. A first rough estimate would be 60 MB less which could be quite noticeable on older hardware. I could be wrong on this. However, this makes it impossible to switch CDs before reboot. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 06:49:15PM +0100, jdd wrote: > * can we run a completely unattended install? no yast at all? > > In fact, could this be a solution: I know there is an option > do do so or nearly, for mass installs. Factories do a sort of dd of the whole HD. They plug in the HD and with the codes provided, it puts the wanted softwareversion, including test software, partitions and anything else, on the HD. I understand that you are frustrated that SUSE version X won't install with your amount of hardware. So the only question you have is: why does Yast with ncusres need so much memory and can it be brought down? I guess that is much more a factory then an opensuse question. houghi -- It is impossible to experience one's death objectively and still carry a tune. -- Woody Allen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 12:20, jdd wrote: > So I think we need to address this usership. if a people > uses a Debian on his server, he will use a debian on his > client... so he must use a SUSE on the server Will he? I use Debian and Gentoo on my Sun Ultra 5 - should SUSE make a sparc port because I have an Ultra 5? I use OpenZaurus on my SL-5500, should SUSE do something about that as well? SUSE, imho, has a target market of people with relatively new hardware, at most a few years old, and typically towards a higher end. Other distros, like Damn Small Linux, are geared towards old hardware, nearing unusable. You can't have a single distro that does everything, it just doesn't work out logistically. If you wanted a SUSE base that was DSL-like in nature, then customize SUSE and release it - its not that complicated really. Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
guesses about problems and solutions. Users asks for more and more friendly installations. now used kernels are so hudge they need more than 3 floppies to boot. 10.1 root image is 70Mo. this is certainly needed for many users. SUSE must be granted to have a yast version with ncurse UI and nearly all (may be really all) the advantages of the graphical one. this is very good, don't drop it :-) thanks :-) once installed, the console / yast version runs quite well on a mush less demanding system than the one advertised on the box. (-we should have an idea of the true limits to advertise them on the wiki). It seems than the install moment is crucial. If you pass the install, so far so good. so why, and what can be done with the less possible resources? let me try to find some answers. * At install time, we have no idea of what the Hardware is. So we need to test anything, have any possible module at hand. * we can unload unused modules - is this enough? * At some moment of the install, we go from a boot kernel to an install kernel is there some memory lack? * how could we use a better swap * can we run a completely unattended install? no yast at all? In fact, could this be a solution: I know there is an option do do so or nearly, for mass installs. What di I need for a basic install? * langage (facultative - english could do, but localization is good) * / root partition - manually setup. as a first attempt, I don't see any other... ext2 is nice and can easily changed for ext3. we need only to install a console running, reading floppies and hard drive. on such thing, may be IDE is enough (cheap hardware)? basic SCSI if possible. it's not even necessary to have a boot loader if we can boot with grub (floppy grub, slack disk...) I just experiment than having the first cd (and the first cd is probably too much) copied on the hard drive and grub, one can start the install without anyting else. If we could have an experimental system here, we could enhance it. I'm ready to experiment this if one gives me some clues and links thanks jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
i'm back. I don't want to flame anything/anybody, so please keep trying to be constructive. exposure of motivations: The hardware situation: may be I'm wrong, but It xeems to me that we are in a period where hardware changes are slowing (I speak of central units/motherboard). I don't really know how to say that. power is growing and exceed most of the real needs. lowend today computer (say a Sempron, 256Mg ram, 80Mb Hard drive) is much stronger than most people need. However companies don't like to keep too old hardware an send to trash can they PIII 800 computers. It's on the point than one must now _pay_ to get rid of old computers an many small companies are happy to give them for free. So very cheap computers, 10 to 5 years old, perfectly running. on our side, there are more and more high band DSL lines. I have at home a 10/1 Mb line (Down/Up), fixed IP. So I can with ease take a nearly free computer, set it up as a server and start my own small local net. The software situation: Linux is ideal for such server, even if you use windows for client. Linux (SUSE, but others also) tend to follow the flow and give more and more bells and wistles. I really like some new Kde features :-), but these features have nearly no interest for a server. So what? We have at hand a great number of outdated computers, needing on the edge security and running perfectly with yesterday distros... but running pretty well with new Linus Distro, given you can install it. So I think we need to address this usership. if a people uses a Debian on his server, he will use a debian on his client... so he must use a SUSE on the server (to be continued) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 11:24, jdd wrote: > Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > > Actually, it is stupid. Stupid and inflammatory. > > sadly you answer often on this ridiculous flame mode. No, I get agitated by ridiculous comments, like saying "do we want to puch all these people out of SUSE world???" Before you make what is definitely, imho, a stupid comment like that, you should try to resolve the problem first. > > Now, a graphical installer having more capabilities added to it... you > > expect it to need _less_ power? > > if you had read my post, you should know I don't use at all > any graphic on this computer (in fact I try to use a very > lightweit one :-) and no graphical yast, should not work anyway. That was nowhere within your original post. > > thing. Ask it to do more, and it needs more. You want less ram to be > > needed? Use a more lightweight DE. > > my concern is that yast, in the lighter ncurse mode still > ask for many power. However the 9.1 yast runs very well. for > any unknown (for me) reason, the _install_ yast asks for > more power than the normal one. Might be worthwhile to emulate the installation process, and see where and how much of a spike in memory usage exists. Also, saying it crashes and whether or not it uses alot of memory are two very different things. Have you run memtest on your hardware? Are you 100% sure there isn't a physical problem with the ram installed in this older system? Give that a shot and lets see if any errors come up there - I had a similar issue with an AMD 800 system with 384MB ram... one 128mb dimm was screwed. I pulled it, and install went beautifully. > I must go, then :-(, sorry, more on this in some time. I > think there is a solution. > > jdd Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
houghi wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 01:54:27PM +0100, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote: >>> You can do ALT-CTRL-F2 and activate your swap partition. >> Sorry, CTRL-F2 if you are in text mode. > > Both should work, I think. > > houghi alt F2, by the way jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Joseph M. Gaffney wrote: > Actually, it is stupid. Stupid and inflammatory. sadly you answer often on this ridiculous flame mode. > Now, a graphical installer having more capabilities added to it... you expect > it to need _less_ power? if you had read my post, you should know I don't use at all any graphic on this computer (in fact I try to use a very lightweit one :-) and no graphical yast, should not work anyway. > thing. Ask it to do more, and it needs more. You want less ram to be > needed? Use a more lightweight DE. my concern is that yast, in the lighter ncurse mode still ask for many power. However the 9.1 yast runs very well. for any unknown (for me) reason, the _install_ yast asks for more power than the normal one. I must go, then :-(, sorry, more on this in some time. I think there is a solution. jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote: > You can do ALT-CTRL-F2 and activate your swap partition. curious thing. a swap partition is already active as I mentioned (250Mo). 10.1 install asked (proposed partition sheme) to have a second one. I did it, mkswap, swap on.. and this broke yast (stalled, need to reboot) seems not to like the stuf I did on #2 console :-( jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 06:52, jdd wrote: > Pascal Bleser wrote: > > Jean-Daniel could you *please* avoid such stupid and polemic statements. > > Of course no one wants to "push all these people out of SUSE world", > > such statements are - excuse me - just plain dumb. > > alas it's not stupid. this has been the SUSE way from the > beginning. each new suse asks for more computer power, just > for install with yast. Actually, it is stupid. Stupid and inflammatory. Now, a graphical installer having more capabilities added to it... you expect it to need _less_ power? More abilities = more requirements. Welcome to modern computing. > > Did you see some statement somewhere that SUSE Linux is not supposed to > > run on older hardware ? I didn't. Hence, this is just a bug on this > > particular notebook, that's it. > > alas, I do > > http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/sysreqs.html > > "Main memory: At least 256 MB; 512 MB recommended" > > and most low end computers have only 128 > > http://www.pckado.com/catalogue_client/Main.php?do=stdList&rubrique=ordinat >eurs > > so, true, my laptop can't. For a full graphical environment, yes. This is not a SUSE specific issue, this is GNOME & KDE - again, we're talking about this whole modern technology thing. Ask it to do more, and it needs more. You want less ram to be needed? Use a more lightweight DE. > notice that I don't really need 10.0, I could really well > live with 9.1 if the security upadtes where here. after all > the kernel is already 2.6... As long as you're keeping it up to date, there isn't really anything wrong with that. I do believe in up to date linux everywhere, though. I would recommend a text-mode install, if you have not done so already, or perhaps autoyast pre-tweaked for your config. > so may be the solution could be to keep _one_ low end > distribution downloadable and with at least security updates > for ten years. Ten years?!?! Noone is going to do that. Noone. You want it? You do it. You support it. > or may be we need a full console install, with no > semi-graphical interface > > jdd :-( Joseph M. Gaffney aka CuCullin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
jdd a �crit : >> Jean-Daniel could you *please* avoid such stupid and polemic statements. Thank you Pascal for the answer to my previous question! I'll use *this* to accentuate! >> Of course no one wants to "push all these people out of SUSE world", >> such statements are - excuse me - just plain dumb. > > alas it's not stupid. this has been the SUSE way from the > beginning. each new suse asks for more computer power, just > for install with yast. > +1 YaST rules but YaST is *Big_n_Fat* ;-) It makes the whole thing, each release, *far* too hangry with new hardware power to my point of view too! > so may be the solution could be to keep _one_ low end > distribution downloadable and with at least security updates > for ten years. You should look at debian for such a long support as this is against commercial distros goal/possibility! > > or may be we need a full console install, with no > semi-graphical interface > Looks like YaST is still *Big_n_Fat* with ncurse! Far from "small is beautiful"! > jdd :-( > And *please*, avoid telling me this is polemic as these are purely *facts*, if you have started with 5.2, and still have some memory of it! I'm not flaming, only raising *facts*, as could do an opened eyes 8 years SuSE user. This also means that I *Like* it a lot! MaNU -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 01:54:27PM +0100, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote: > >You can do ALT-CTRL-F2 and activate your swap partition. > > Sorry, CTRL-F2 if you are in text mode. Both should work, I think. houghi -- Reality is for people who lack imagination. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Hi, On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Eberhard Moenkeberg wrote: On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, jdd wrote: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: What about switching to SLES 9? It is very similar to SUSE Linux 9.1 and has a much longer support period. I speak of cheap solutions. I don't know if such clients could afford a paid solution. However I don't know what is the price. and the specification is the same as 10.0 (256Mb ram) :-( You can do ALT-CTRL-F2 and activate your swap partition. Sorry, CTRL-F2 if you are in text mode. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Hi, On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, jdd wrote: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: What about switching to SLES 9? It is very similar to SUSE Linux 9.1 and has a much longer support period. I speak of cheap solutions. I don't know if such clients could afford a paid solution. However I don't know what is the price. and the specification is the same as 10.0 (256Mb ram) :-( You can do ALT-CTRL-F2 and activate your swap partition. Cheers -e -- Eberhard Moenkeberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > What about switching to SLES 9? It is very similar to SUSE > Linux 9.1 and has a much longer support period. I speak of cheap solutions. I don't know if such clients could afford a paid solution. However I don't know what is the price. and the specification is the same as 10.0 (256Mb ram) :-( jdd -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
jdd schrieb: > > http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/sysreqs.html > > "Main memory: At least 256 MB; 512 MB recommended" > > and most low end computers have only 128 > > notice that I don't really need 10.0, I could really well > live with 9.1 if the security upadtes where here. after all > the kernel is already 2.6... > > so may be the solution could be to keep _one_ low end > distribution downloadable and with at least security updates > for ten years. What about switching to SLES 9? It is very similar to SUSE Linux 9.1 and has a much longer support period. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
Pascal Bleser wrote: >> 10.0 is significantly faster but crashes in the same area, >> all this making install impossible (of course Ncurse >> version, not graphical ones). > > Sounds like a bug report. Any further information ? > Are you able to partition it "manually" ? (fdisk + mkreiserfs) in fact the disk is already partitioned, but I want to keep my existing linux up, and the default partitioning sheme is to recover it, so I need to say where is / :-) > > Anything "special" like LVM ? > What filesystem (reiser3, ext3, xfs) ? no. the only special thing is that I start with grub and linux/inird copied from the cd. this install tools is configuring the pcmcia, but not completely so I can't read the cd and need to copy the cd content to the hard drive. result is at some time yast lasting for ever, visibly on an infinite loop reading the hard drive. I think there has been an variable allocation too big for the physical ram and not cachable in swap (but I don't know for sure, of course) > Jean-Daniel could you *please* avoid such stupid and polemic statements. > Of course no one wants to "push all these people out of SUSE world", > such statements are - excuse me - just plain dumb. alas it's not stupid. this has been the SUSE way from the beginning. each new suse asks for more computer power, just for install with yast. > > Did you see some statement somewhere that SUSE Linux is not supposed to > run on older hardware ? I didn't. Hence, this is just a bug on this > particular notebook, that's it. alas, I do http://www.novell.com/products/suselinux/sysreqs.html "Main memory: At least 256 MB; 512 MB recommended" and most low end computers have only 128 http://www.pckado.com/catalogue_client/Main.php?do=stdList&rubrique=ordinateurs so, true, my laptop can't. notice that I don't really need 10.0, I could really well live with 9.1 if the security upadtes where here. after all the kernel is already 2.6... so may be the solution could be to keep _one_ low end distribution downloadable and with at least security updates for ten years. or may be we need a full console install, with no semi-graphical interface jdd :-( -- http://www.dodin.net http://dodin.org/galerie_photo_web/expo/index.html http://lucien.dodin.net http://fr.susewiki.org/index.php?title=Gérer_ses_photos - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [opensuse] harware compatibility
jdd wrote: I have a problem with the two openSUSE distributions (10.0 and 10.1). For more than ten years, now, I push Linux to users with little money, to be used on not so old computers, still perfectly working. It seems not to work anymore with SUSE Linux. My actual test PC is an Acer travelmate sub laptop. P233 (lack of power, but this is not the blocking part), 77Mo ram, 12Gb hard drive. this kind of machine can be found second hand, but on the range $150-$200, so not so low end. SUSE 9.1 runs perfectly on it, but is near the end of its support time. Indeed. I'm pretty sure that the new SUSE Linux could run without problem, but they don't install... 10.1 is incredibly slow (250 Mb swap) and crashes on the "partitioning" part of yast. 10.1 is *beta* 10.0 is significantly faster but crashes in the same area, all this making install impossible (of course Ncurse version, not graphical ones). Sounds like a bug report. Any further information ? Are you able to partition it "manually" ? (fdisk + mkreiserfs) Anything "special" like LVM ? What filesystem (reiser3, ext3, xfs) ? Are you repartitioning it or just using the existing partitions from 9.1 ? I'm sure I can install any Debian. I'm quite sure that a large part of the planet still use such computers. Two years ago, I had as own server a P160 with less ram and much less hard drive, it has been used for 3 years without any problem (SUSE 8.0) do we want to puch all these people out of SUSE world??? Jean-Daniel could you *please* avoid such stupid and polemic statements. Of course no one wants to "push all these people out of SUSE world", such statements are - excuse me - just plain dumb. Did you see some statement somewhere that SUSE Linux is not supposed to run on older hardware ? I didn't. Hence, this is just a bug on this particular notebook, that's it. Sorry for my harsh reaction but I'm getting sick of some people always having to start a flame war. Can't we just discuss this normally, without having to throw such statements into the room ? Try to gather some additional information about why/where the YaST2 partitioner is crashing and please do submit a bug report on Bugzilla - i.e. some constructive work. cheers -- -o) Pascal Bleser http://linux01.gwdg.de/~pbleser/ /\\ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _\_v FOSDEM 2006 -- 25+26 February 2006 in Brussels signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
