I gotta tell you, this is worse than I thought. I set the update manager
to exclude proprietary device drivers (restricted) and allowed it to
download and install everything else, and it again totally screwed up
the machine, knocking out among other things the high-resolution
display, so I had to
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
I gotta tell you, this is worse than I thought. I set the update manager
to exclude proprietary device drivers (restricted) and allowed it to
download and install everything else, and it again totally screwed up
Or, alternatively try the Jaunty (9.04) beta when it comes out on the
21st of March, if you aren't afraid of testing new things. Among other
things it should probably have improved hardware support.
Harry
Quoting Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Rowan
I'm getting less reluctant all the time!
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 07:36 +, Sean Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
I gotta tell you, this is worse than I thought. I set the update manager
to exclude proprietary device drivers
On 09/03/09 07:22, Rowan Berkeley wrote:
I gotta tell you, this is worse than I thought. I set the update manager
to exclude proprietary device drivers (restricted) and allowed it to
download and install everything else, and it again totally screwed up
the machine, knocking out among other
2009/3/9 Rowan Berkeley rowan.berke...@googlemail.com:
I gotta tell you, this is worse than I thought. I set the update manager
to exclude proprietary device drivers (restricted) and allowed it to
That wasn't wise.
I'd recommend learning what things are before randomly unclicking them :)
2009/3/9 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net:
I will repeat my previous advice -- forget restore disc, install
from 8.10 instead.
That wouldn't help in this case. If he was running 8.10 vanilla and
unticked 'restricted' he'd end up in pretty much the same place. It's
not the install disc, it's the
I think Sean's approach is a lot more sensible for someone in my
position than yours, Al: especially because he included the magic words,
It should detect all your hardware fine.
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 07:36 +, Sean Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Rowan Berkeley
2009/3/9 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net:
Ah, hadn't spotted that... true...
still am of the opinion, though,
that if he's still at the stage where he can re-install (or restore
or whatever) without losing things he'd do better with a more
up-to-date, and vanilla, install.
Sure, and I can
2009/3/9 Rowan Berkeley rowan.berke...@googlemail.com:
I think Sean's approach is a lot more sensible for someone in my
position than yours, Al: especially because he included the magic words,
It should detect all your hardware fine.
_should_
Good luck. Let us know if it does, and if it
If I was running a consistent and up to date version of the OS, the
situation wouldn't arise in which I would be tempted to uncheck the
drivers updates option.
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 09:19 +, Sean Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Alan Pope a...@popey.com wrote:
2009/3/9 Sean
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Alan Pope a...@popey.com wrote:
indeed it _should_). However, the fact still remains that he'll likely
lose any support from LC.
Is that a bad thing? If you take that to its logical conclusion then
he'll never be able to upgrade anything in his life, which would
2009/3/9 Sean Miller s...@seanmiller.net:
If you take that to its logical conclusion then
he'll never be able to upgrade anything in his life, which would be a
shame... stuck with a Spring 2008 version for the rest of the
machine's useful life...
Not true. You can't possibly know what extra
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Alan Pope a...@popey.com wrote:
Good luck. Let us know if it does, and if it doesn't I'm sure we can help.
_however_ the solution _even_ if you are on 8.10 _may_ well still
involve downloading some source code and manually compiling it.
Don't think that
If all LinuxCertified did was buy a batch of snazzy Korean executive
laptops, with Windows Vista already installed on them, and then install
out-of-date and un-updatable versions of ubuntu on them, then tweak them
to make it work as long as they weren't updated, then I would be better
off without
I wouldn't mind installing 8.10, and then I could run all the updates as
and when they appear, and enjoy all the cutting edge improvements. But
it's true that I do not know whether the non-default interface driver
was necessitated by the particular interface card used by Compal, the
manufacturer
Hello, Michael,
That's very nice of you to offer. You wouldn't want to come round here
though, this place is unbelievably horrible, believe me. It has serious
rising damp and galloping fungus mould all over the walls, and I am in
dispute with my landlords about it even as we speak, with the
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
I wouldn't mind installing 8.10, and then I could run all the updates as
and when they appear, and enjoy all the cutting edge improvements. But
it's true that I do not know whether the non-default interface
Indeed, I was laboring under a misconception there. It sounds quite
straightforward, when you explain it like that ...
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 12:13 +, Michael G Fletcher wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
I wouldn't mind installing
I hadn't considered the LiveCD aspect... you are, of course,
absolutely right Michael. So there's no need for Rowan to even
install to prove that 8.10 brings up the network without any problems.
Sean
--
ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
Indeed, I was laboring under a misconception there. It sounds quite
straightforward, when you explain it like that ...
Great! I think it explains where some of the frustration was creeping
into the list from
But I would have lost all my applications if I had done what Tony
suggested earlier, here is what he said:
Did you try my advice of booting the kernel originally supplied by LC?
I don't think the 'restricted' drivers are the problem, it's the fact
that LC installed a non-standard kernel module
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Michael G Fletcher
mich...@ilovemylinux.com wrote:
Great! I think it explains where some of the frustration was creeping
into the list from :-) Something we need to work on, making sure that
advise is targeted with the correct background information. What
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Rowan Berkeley
rowan.berke...@googlemail.com wrote:
You see I did ask LinuxCertified about the two discs they supplied, and
they confirmed that the one I have now used twice has all the
applications, but the other one has none of them.
Be very interested to
Michael, I am actually using the new machine right now, with the updater
switched off. When this email came, I was just gonna go out and buy a
pack of blank CD/R-W's. But since you offer, a ready-burned copy would
be very nice.
As it happens, everything on this list gets crawled by Google, so I
Yes, both discs they supplied contain their non-default driver along
with all of the (otherwise standard) kernel components, but the one I
used also contains the applications, whereas the other doesn't.
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 12:41 +, Sean Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:31 PM,
Rowan Berkeley wrote:
But I would have lost all my applications if I had done what Tony
suggested earlier, here is what he said:
Did you try my advice of booting the kernel originally supplied by LC?
[...]
Hello, Rowan.
No you wouldn't!
You can boot different kernels under the same
Ah, I see. I thought you were talking about using the other disc that
came with the machine, the one without the apps. So I had completely the
wrong idea of what you meant. Thanks.
On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 16:02 +, Tony Travis wrote:
Rowan Berkeley wrote:
But I would have lost all my
28 matches
Mail list logo
