Wish to try Linux

[Peter Percival]

I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
download will be gratefully received.

[Jean-David Beyer]

I happen to run Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. You are mot supposed to
download it from them unless you have a contract with them. You are
allowed to download the source modules, however, and build them
yourself. In any case, the full distribution of that comes on a DVD
because the previous version, available on CD-ROMS took, IIRC, 6 of the
things.

If you happen to want that distribution, better get it for free from
CentOS. I think it is probably DVD only as well.

There may be smaller releases of Linux operating system, but I do not
keep up with that.

[Dan Espen]

Any distro should work.
Ubuntu and Fedora are popular.

You can use the same CD for different machines.
You don't even have to install, just insert the CD and reboot.
Linux will run right from the CD.

--
Dan Espen

[The Natural Philosopher]

linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel but you
need a GB of RAM.

download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so install
it. It wont mash windows in the process..

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[Robert Heller]

Yes, you can download any number of 'live' CD ISOs, burn as many copies as you
like and use them on as many computers as you like.

You probably should download a current incarnation of Ubuntu. The 'elderly'
computer is probably 32-bit (i386) and the Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook is
*probably* 64-bit (am64). You can download the 32-bit (i386) ISO file can use
that on either machine (although if the new machine has more than 4gig of RAM
it won't all be accessable with the 32-bit incarnation). Alternitively, you
can download and burn one of each type: 32-bit (i386) and 64-bit (am64) and
use the 32-bit (i386) on on the elderly Windows XP computer and the 64-bit
(am64) one on the Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook.

You can get Ubuntu from www.ubuntu.com.

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Bit Twister]

On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:09:17 +0100, Peter Percival wrote:
> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
> an elderly Windows XP computer?

Absolutely. Be sure to burn it as an image and not data.
You can pick from http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=popularity

You can download the live cd which will boot and run from the media.
Ignore the slow response because the cd is slow and has to unpack
applications. Once installed on hard disk, it will be faster than the
original installed OS.

There are two basic desktop managers. Gnome and KDE. KDE will be more
windows like in operation. I run Mageia using their DVD which
allows me to install several Desktop Managers. I use KDE but run
several Gnome applications since both libraries and applications are
installed.


Windows to Linux cross reference in no particular order:
http://www.linuxrsp.ru/win-lin-soft/table-eng.html
http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/Application_Crossover_Chart
http://www.linuxlinks.com/article/20070701111340544/Equivalents.html

[unruh]

To try it, download a "live" version and burn it to Cd. Now, one of the
key problem sis that it will be very slow to boot up (Cds are slow). and
preserving changes is hard.
You can certainly use it on both.
Mageia One version 2 is what I used. but there are loads of options out
there.

[Robert Heller]

Two DVDs. CentOS is *probably* not a good choise for a totally newbie though.

>
> There may be smaller releases of Linux operating system, but I do not
> keep up with that.
>

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 09/05/13 21:24, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Thu, 09 May 2013 15:25:27 -0400 Jean-David Beyer <jeand...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2013 03:09 PM, Peter Percival wrote:
>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>>> to download will be gratefully received.
>> I happen to run Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. You are mot supposed to
>> download it from them unless you have a contract with them. You are
>> allowed to download the source modules, however, and build them
>> yourself. In any case, the full distribution of that comes on a DVD
>> because the previous version, available on CD-ROMS took, IIRC, 6 of the
>> things.
>>
>> If you happen to want that distribution, better get it for free from
>> CentOS. I think it is probably DVD only as well.
> Two DVDs. CentOS is *probably* not a good choise for a totally newbie though.
>

No. I would have said ubuntu but unity sux so I said Mint ...

>> There may be smaller releases of Linux operating system, but I do not
>> keep up with that.
>>


--

[Octothorpe]

On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:48:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>> to download will be gratefully received.
> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel but you
> need a GB of RAM.
>
> download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so install

What's a boo tit?

[Jean-David Beyer]

On 05/09/2013 04:24 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Thu, 09 May 2013 15:25:27 -0400 Jean-David Beyer <jeand...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2013 03:09 PM, Peter Percival wrote:
>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>>> to download will be gratefully received.
>> I happen to run Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. You are mot supposed to
>> download it from them unless you have a contract with them. You are
>> allowed to download the source modules, however, and build them
>> yourself. In any case, the full distribution of that comes on a DVD
>> because the previous version, available on CD-ROMS took, IIRC, 6 of the
>> things.
>>
>> If you happen to want that distribution, better get it for free from
>> CentOS. I think it is probably DVD only as well.
> Two DVDs. CentOS is *probably* not a good choise for a totally newbie though.

I agree.
The Red Hat version is one DVD and a couple of CD-ROMs with extra stuff,
and I never loaded them.

My friends mostly used Ubuntu for the longest time, but seem to be using
other things now. I do not keep track of what they do.

[The Natural Philosopher]

i could tell you, butt hen I'd have to kill you.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> need a GB of RAM.

How good can it be? I ran full Slackware install on less than .5G
RAM. Only upgraded to a smokin' 3/4G RAM, recently. ;)

nb

[bad sector]

as most everyone advises a live-cd is a good way to eyeball what linux
is about, just remember that it will be FAR from a comprehensive revelation

here's one place to evaluate initial popularity (with links)

http://distrowatch.com/?newsid=07273

don't let the number of distros spook you :-)

if your computer(s) can boot from a usb external disk you may be able to
do a comlpete installation onto a usb hard drive (something to
investigate maybe later)

just in passing, you can install many different linux systems (distros &
versions) one any computer together with several version of windows,
that would be for later too...

[Robert Heller]

Mint has a 'fancy' GUI.

>
> nb

[Michael Black]

At one point, some of the slicker distributions required quite a bit of
RAM to install. They'd say it flat out "needs XX megs to install, but can
run with YY ram". Then if you were lucky, there was fine print saying
that you actually could install the slick distribution, so long as you
went with the text installer.

I suppose that's still the case, though the usual amount of RAM has
increased that it affects fewer people.

Michael

[Stef]

I advise before you download anything, or install anything, find a good
"general" book on Linux. And read and STUDY the hell out of it.
Remember: Linux isn't Windows. So, don't assume it works the same way.

The book I started with was RUNNING LINUX (O'Reilly, pub.), but even the
latest edition, I think the 5th, is 8 years out of date.

Stef

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/05/13 01:35, Robert Heller wrote:
> At 9 May 2013 23:49:53 GMT notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> need a GB of RAM.
>> How good can it be? I ran full Slackware install on less than .5G
>> RAM. Only upgraded to a smokin' 3/4G RAM, recently. ;)
> Mint has a 'fancy' GUI.

its less that than the fact it takes an age to do anything run any programs without 1GB


Yes, it installed OK on 512Mbye or RAM. i could even load and run
firefox. But that was it. Any other program beyond firefox was swapping.
Worse the disk caching was non-existent.

I.e. the OS and GUI weren't the problem: the apps were.


> .


>> nb

[Aragorn]

On Thursday 09 May 2013 21:09, Peter Percival conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
> on an elderly Windows XP computer?

Yes, you can do that, but bear in mind that there are 32-bit
distributions and 64-bit distributions. A 32-bit system will work on a
64-bit machine, but not vice versa. ;-)

That said, a CD is probably not going to cover it all. Most
distributions come as DVD images these days. As other posters have told
you, you must burn the DVD /from/ the image, not put the image on the
disk. Typically your burning software will have an option "burn from
ISO" or "burn as raw data" or something of the likes. That's the option
you need.

> Even if I can't use the same CD on both machines, I would like to try
> it on the notebook.

Well, several distributions come as installable live CD/DVDs, which
means that you can already try out the system without needing to install
anything on your hard disk at all, as the system will run off the CD/DVD
drive. This will of course be rather slow compared to a hard disk
installation, but it should be enough to let you look around and play
with it.

> I know nothing about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations
> of which Linux to download will be gratefully received.

Many here have advised you Ubuntu or Mint - Mint is actually an Ubuntu
derivative - and while both may be "easy" for beginners, the downside of
them is that they also /keep you trapped/ in that beginner stage,
because they obfuscate the full experience.

I would therefore recommend something else, and in my experience,
PCLinuxOS would be a good starting point. It comes as an installable
live CD/DVD - a 64-bit version is available, and although still marked
experimental (by PCLinuxOS), it works rather well. PCLinuxOS is an
offshoot of Mandriva, which is a professional-quality distribution.

Many GNU/Linux distributions these days come in separate versions
depending on the graphical user interface you wish to use - this
includes the Ubuntu and Mint distributions - but this "segregation"
gives newbies the wrong impression of the system, because you can
install multiple graphical user interfaces side by side on the same
GNU/Linux installation and alternate between them, or have one user
account use one GUI and another user account use another GUI. You can
even log in twice on separate virtual consoles - GNU/Linux is a UNIX-
style operating system and is thus a multi-user system - and start
different GUIs in each of them.

The most commonly used GUIs these days are GNOME 3, KDE 4, XFCE, LXDE,
Cinnamon and MATE. The latter two are attempting to continue the look
and feel of GNOME 2. MATE does this by building upon the GTK2 libraries
that GNOME 2 was built against, Cinnamon in turn does it by using the
GTK3 libraries of GNOME 3 and providing in essence a wrapper around
GNOME 3.

Ubuntu's Unity interface is also a wrapper around GNOME 3 but has a
different look and feel to it (with some MacIntosh-inspired aspects),
which not everyone is happy about - it was actually designed for
netbooks and tablets, but Canonical, the organization behind Ubuntu,
then chose to make it the default for /all/ installations. Ubuntu is
either way to be shunned because it now officially contains spyware and
adware, courtesy of Canonical's deal with amazon.com. The
spyware/adware can be removed, but a newbie won't know where to look,
and they shouldn't have to be obligated to do that in the first place.
So stay away from Ubuntu. ;-)

KDE 4 comes with a very Windows-like look and feel "out of the box", but
is highly configurable and customizable, and can be made to look (and
feel) completely different. LXDE and XFCE are also rather Windows-like
in their look and feel.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the equivalent of the Windows
Administrator account is called "root" in UNIX operating systems, but
you should /never/ log in as root to do any normal work. Ubuntu and
derivatives like Mint even prevent you from doing that by "sabotaging"
the root account. You should either way always create a normal,
unprivileged user account for your daily work, and use that one.

UNIX is also not a mono-culture like Microsoft Windows. It's in essence
one big toolbox, and if you're not happy about the look and feel of a
particular tool, then there are always alternatives. So, to give you an
example, there are dozens of web browsers, e-mail clients, Usenet
newsreaders, file managers, CD/DVD burning applications, multimedia
players, et al. And you can install them all - well, most of them
anyway - side by side, and pick the one you like best.

You should also not be worried about viruses or about setting up a
firewall. UNIX systems only listen on ports you explicitly opened (by
having a service listen on them) and will silently drop anything else,
and the mechanisms of propagation of viruses in Windows won't work in
UNIX because the system is organized entirely differently. For
instance, in UNIX, nothing is executable unless it is stored on a
filesystem and given execute permission for the user trying to execute
it. So e-mail attachments and the likes are by definition not
executable.

Yet another thing is that there are no drive letters. In UNIX, there is
only a single, unified and uniform directory hierarchy, and additional
volumes simply get "mounted" onto directories in the tree. Should you
decide to install it on your machine, then you'll need to create at
least two partitions: a root filesystem for the system itself, and a
designated swap partition (which does not have a filesystem on it). It
is however advisable that you would also create a third partition for
the contents of /home. That way, your personal files will be kept
separate from the rest of the system, should you ever need to reinstall
or upgrade, and/or format the root filesystem. If you choose to create
this additional partition during installation, then it will
automatically be mounted on the directory /home when the system boots.

All GNU/Linux systems come with documentation. The graphical user
interfaces run on top of the system as a graphical wrapper the way
Windows 3.x and older used to run on top of DOS, so the underlying
system is all made up of command line utilities, and for most part,
anything you do in the GUI will be using those very command line
utilities in the background.

Each of those utilities has a manual, called a man page, but this is
rather tricky for newbies. There should however be ample documentation
installed in HTML form under /usr/share/doc. Much of that HTML
information may be outdated, but then again it is not actually meant as
a tutorial. There is also lots of (more or less dated) information
available in the form of HowTos and Guides at...

http://www.tldp.org

Another site you may wish to bookmark is...

http://www.linuxnewbies.org

Usenet is also a good place for finding help, but you need a thick skin.
Some regulars will scoff at anyone posting to a GNU/Linux newsgroup from
a Windows newsreader - even though most Windows newsreaders can also be
run in GNU/Linux by way of WINE, a Windows compatibility ABI for UNIX
systems. Certain newsgroups are also ridden with Win-trolls - some of
whom may actually be on Microsoft's payroll - and they will do anything
to reel the newbies in over to their camp. Several newsgroups have
already been ruined by such trolls, including alt.os.linux.ubuntu (and
alt.os.linux.mint isn't far behind, as the same trolls are camping there
as well). So there's another reason why _not_ to use Ubuntu or Mint. :p

In the end, GNU/Linux is all about choice and freedom. One man's
favorite distribution will be scoffed and mocked by another man. You'll
just have to find the distro that works right for you, and there are
/many/ really good ones out there: Mageia, PCLinuxOS, openSUSE, Debian,
Slackware, Arch, et al. But Slack and Arch require you to get your
hands dirty early on in the game, so those are not really newbie-
friendly.

Bottom line, I think you should start with PCLinuxOS. You can always
switch to another distribution later if that's what you want.

Think it through. Not just what I wrote here above, but also what the
other posters said. Let it all sink in. Then pick one and give it a
try. If you don't like it, pick another one. There are plenty to
choose from, and they're not costing you any money. (Hint: I use
rewritable optical media, so I can always recycle any CDs/DVDs I've
burned.)

Welcome to GNU/Linux. Your entire computing experience is about to
change very drastically. And you'll be loving it. :-)

--
= Aragorn =
GNU/Linux user #223157 - http://www.linuxcounter.net

[The Natural Philosopher]

That is making some very broad assumptions about the OPs motives in
trying linux, Aragorn.
For some of us a windows like GUI that doesn't crash, isn't infested
with spyware malware and downright bloat, is a goal sufficient unto itself.

And I've been a unix man for years.
What I am trying to say, is that for many windows is not bad, as a way
to launch programs and use a desktop computer, if it only wasn't locked
in, expensive bug ridden flaky and treated us like idiots.

And probably the minimal step that gets the desired result is today, Mint.

At that point one has a choice: accept it for what it is, or start to
tinker, and I can assure you that you can still get the 'full linux
experience' by tinkering with it..

OTOH if you want to play with code and operating systems, why not get a
Raspberry PI, and run debian on it?

Apart from that, IF your assumptions are true, what you said in the post
is of course sound advice.

[DenverD]

On 05/09/2013 09:09 PM, Peter Percival wrote:
> I know nothing about Linux or computers in general, so
> recommendations of which Linux to download will be gratefully received.

i've never used either myself but i hear that Mint is probably the
easiest first linux to use...others say Ubuntu is the easiest

http://lifehacker.com/5993297/ubuntu-vs-mint-which-linux-distro-is-better-for-beginners

i started on Red Hat (before there was a Fedora) and tried several
over the years and have mostly 'settled' on openSUSE..

whatever you choose, take plenty of patience and a willingness to
both read and try-fail-try again, because Linux is NOT Windows, see
http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

--
DenverD
"It is far easier to read, understand and follow the instructions
than to undo the problems caused by not." so wrote dd on 23 Jan 11

[Aragorn]

On Friday 10 May 2013 08:26, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the

No, I'm not making any such assumptions at all. I am however pointing
out that the choice of certain distributions to obfuscate the underlying
system quite commonly leads to persistent misconceptions among the
GNUbies about how the system works, and as such, to those GNUbies
looking to solve any and all problems they might encounter by using the
same methods as which apply in Microsoft Windows. And _that_ is of
course not going to work, because Microsoft Windows and UNIX are two
entirely different operating system paradigms.

The more two completely different systems appear to have in common at
first glance, the greater the confusion and thus, the steeper the
learning curve. I believe that it is in the GNUbie's best interest that
the system should be user-friendly enough - and thus, Slackware, Arch or
Gentoo would be a bridge too far for a GNUbie - while at the same time
making it clear from the get-go that GNU/Linux is not Microsoft Windows
and was never even intended to mimic or supplant Microsoft Windows on
anybody's computer. GNU/Linux is a UNIX-family operating system, and
its intent was simply to offer a Free (as in "freedom") alternative to
proprietary UNIX.

The all-too-often touted "steep learning curve" of GNU/Linux is
imaginary. For a person who has never ever sat at a computer screen and
keyboard, the learning curve to Microsoft Windows is just as steep as
for GNU/Linux, if not steeper, due to very Microsoft-specific
terminology and Microsoft-specific logic.

GNU/Linux on the other hand is a fully standardized operating system
architecture, and any difficulties at adopting it are typically only the
result of a subconscious indoctrination/conditioning with The Microsoft
Way ™. In other words, someone habituated to Microsoft Windows will
have greater difficulty at adapting him-/herself to GNU/Linux than
someone who has never ever seen a computer in their life before.

> For some of us a windows like GUI that doesn't crash, isn't infested
> with spyware malware and downright bloat, is a goal sufficient unto
> itself.

Yes, but that was not my point. Inevitably, GNUbies run into
difficulties, and most of those difficulties are due to their
indoctrination with The Microsoft Way ™. As such, any and all attempts
to make GNU/Linux appear more like Microsoft Windows will only
subliminally feed the misconception that GNU/Linux would be anything
like Microsoft Windows, or that the logic behind Microsoft Windows -
e.g. how it is configured, how it must be secured, how it must be used,
et al - would be the correct logic which applies to all computers in
general.

> And I've been a unix man for years.
> What I am trying to say, is that for many windows is not bad, as a way
> to launch programs and use a desktop computer, if it only wasn't
> locked in, expensive bug ridden flaky and treated us like idiots.
>
> And probably the minimal step that gets the desired result is today,
> Mint.

Mint is making the first step easier, but by doing it, it is also making
the second step a lot harder. Compare it to an automotive transmission.
If you make first gear shorter, the car will have more torque off the
line and will leap forward faster, possibly with a longer tire squeal
even. But then when you shift into second gear, there's a gap and the
revs drop back too far for the engine to still have enough torque and
horsepower to continue leaping forward as fast as it did in first gear.

I'm subscribed to alt.os.linux.mint, and I see the level of ignorance
and how this ignorance is being catered to by people who are only just
slightly less ignorant, as well as by people who are /just/ as ignorant,
and in the end, everyone's running in circles and nobody comes down to
the point. Even the questions become more and more vague, and you have
to start guessing at what exactly the GNUbie is trying to accomplish and
in which he or she thus needs assistance from the other newsgroup
members.

And of course, having certain notorious trolls in that group - such as
the attention-starved one with the letter-spaced name, who has already
single-handedly managed to destroy alt.os.linux.ubuntu by his promotion
of anti-intellectualism and his attacks on people such as myself - isn't
helping the learning process of the GNUbie.

> At that point one has a choice: accept it for what it is, or start to
> tinker, and I can assure you that you can still get the 'full linux
> experience' by tinkering with it..

Yes, but the decision to start tinkering is that second gear I spoke of.
If you put people off on the wrong foot first by intentionally or
unintentionally portraying GNU/Linux as "an alternative version of
Microsoft Windows" or even as an intended competitor for Microsoft
Windows, then you've already damaged the GNUbie's understanding and
ergo, his/her ability to learn.

> OTOH if you want to play with code and operating systems, why not get
> a Raspberry PI, and run debian on it?

Or Gentoo, or Slackware, or Arch, or Source Mage, or LFS. But that's
not exactly GNUbie territory, is it? :-)

> Apart from that, IF your assumptions are true, what you said in the
> post is of course sound advice.

Given that I was not making any assumptions but rather pointing out a
very real and observable phenomenon, I believe that my advice was sound,
yes. :-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/05/13 08:18, Aragorn wrote:
> On Friday 10 May 2013 08:26, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the
> following to comp.os.linux.misc...
>

>> Apart from that, IF your assumptions are true, what you said in the
>> post is of course sound advice.
> Given that I was not making any assumptions but rather pointing out a
> very real and observable phenomenon, I believe that my advice was sound,
> yes. :-)
>

No, I still think you are mistaking the groups of people who want to try
Linux. For some people they bought Windows, its well known shortcomings
piss them off, and they cant afford a mac, so linux presents an
alternative, and believe me, that's a big sector and its catered for by
Mint - used to be Ubuntu but they have gone 'weird'

They are not that interested in how it runs 'under the hood' and they
don't know anything about how to fix windows either. OK most of them are
going Android, but a lot of laptop and home users that need a keyboard
are finding that a simple to install linux with a decent browser, email
and word processor suits their needs.

And that's why distros like MInt, which select the best options in an
integrated package are very handy.

The sort of tekgeek who was continuously editing his registry is
probably over-represented in usenet groups, but not in the rest of the world

[Aragorn]

On Friday 10 May 2013 11:20, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the

following to comp.os.linux.misc...

> On 10/05/13 08:18, Aragorn wrote:
>
>> On Friday 10 May 2013 08:26, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the
>> following to comp.os.linux.misc...
>>
>>> Apart from that, IF your assumptions are true, what you said in the
>>> post is of course sound advice.
>>
>> Given that I was not making any assumptions but rather pointing out a
>> very real and observable phenomenon, I believe that my advice was
>> sound, yes. :-)
>>
> No, I still think you are mistaking the groups of people who want to
> try Linux. For some people they bought Windows, its well known
> shortcomings piss them off, and they cant afford a mac, so linux
> presents an alternative, and believe me, that's a big sector and its
> catered for by Mint - used to be Ubuntu but they have gone 'weird'
>
> They are not that interested in how it runs 'under the hood' and they
> don't know anything about how to fix windows either. OK most of them
> are going Android, but a lot of laptop and home users that need a
> keyboard are finding that a simple to install linux with a decent
> browser, email and word processor suits their needs.
>
> And that's why distros like MInt, which select the best options in an
> integrated package are very handy.
>
> The sort of tekgeek who was continuously editing his registry is
> probably over-represented in usenet groups, but not in the rest of the
> world

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but I do not believe that
catering to ignorance and misconceptions is going to help the GNUbie -
or the rest of the world, for that matter.

Just look at the nature of the problems being reported in newsgroups
like alt.os.linux.mint. Most of those are simply PEBKAC situations, and
they stem from not stimulating the GNUbie into looking at what they're
doing wrong.

Design your system for idiots, and idiots will be the customers/users
you'll attract. And in the end, idiots will also be the only people in
the world willing to use your system, plus that it only serves to widen
the gap between the dumbed-down masses and the developers who write up
the code. Such an attitude breeds elitism, and if it doesn't, then in
the end we'll be stuck with an operating system written as poorly as
Microsoft Windows, because even the developers will have been dumbed
down.

It's no secret that the newest generation of developers all come from
the Windows world, whereas the previous generations still came from the
UNIX world. And as a result, we're seeing all kinds of Windows'isms
creep into the graphical user interfaces - such as a volume-oriented
approach to storage devices rather than a hierarchy-oriented approach,
and the use of the word "folders" for directories, and automounting of
removable storage devices, etc. It's not a conspiracy (as some would
claim), but simply the result of those newer developers not knowing any
better, since they've had their common sense poisoned by Microsoft
Windows.

I cannot and will not condone the dumbing down of society. I'm not
asking for everyone to become a rocket surgeon [*], but I don't think
that we should be following Microsoft's or Apple's bad examples either.
Because they know all too well why they're obfuscating the technical
details, and it has nothing to do with making things easier for the end-
user. It's got to do with keeping the end-user locked in to their
products.


[*] That's an inside joke from alt.os.linux.ubuntu - courtesy of
Cybe R. Wizard - as a contraction of "rocket scientist" and "brain
surgeon".

[Octothorpe]

On Thu, 09 May 2013 23:50:06 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 09/05/13 21:45, Octothorpe wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:48:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>>> 7,
>>>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD
>>>> on both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know
>>>> nothing about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of
>>>> which Linux to download will be gratefully received.
>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel but
>>> you need a GB of RAM.
>>>
>>> download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so
>>> install
>>
>> What's a boo tit?
>>
> i could tell you, butt hen I'd have to kill you.

Ok first it is a boo tit and now it's a butt hen.

Are the two related?

[Octothorpe]

On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:26:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

[putolin]

> And I've been a unix man for years.

I thought you were/are a back door man

[The Natural Philosopher]

I beg your pardon?

[The Natural Philosopher]

I think you can work tha tout, thyself :-).

[Jean-David Beyer]

Yes; both are birds. A boo tit is a wild bird, and a butt hen is a
domesticated one.

[Octothorpe]

On Fri, 10 May 2013 13:00:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 10/05/13 12:44, Octothorpe wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:26:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> [putolin]
>>
>>> And I've been a unix man for years.
>> I thought you were/are a back door man
> I beg your pardon?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_Door_Man

[Octothorpe]

On Fri, 10 May 2013 13:01:36 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 10/05/13 12:41, Octothorpe wrote:
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 23:50:06 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/05/13 21:45, Octothorpe wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:48:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>>>>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running
>>>>>> Windows 7,
>>>>>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>>>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book,
>>>>>> _and_
>>>>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD
>>>>>> on both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know
>>>>>> nothing about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of
>>>>>> which Linux to download will be gratefully received.
>>>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel but
>>>>> you need a GB of RAM.
>>>>>
>>>>> download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so
>>>>> install
>>>> What's a boo tit?
>>>>
>>> i could tell you, butt hen I'd have to kill you.
>> Ok first it is a boo tit and now it's a butt hen.
>>
>> Are the two related?
> I think you can work tha tout, thyself :-).

boo tit, butt hen and now tha tout

[Aragorn]

On Friday 10 May 2013 14:49, Octothorpe conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

Yeah, tha butt hen touts its boot tits. :p

[lichtblitz]

Peter Percival wrote:
> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
> an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
> download will be gratefully received.

It depends on your computer know-how. If don't have much of it and you want to
go easy on you try try either Ubuntu or Mint. For the first install choose a
32-bit release unless you got more than 4GB ram in your notebook. I'd would
also go for the LTS-realease (Long Time Support)

Cheers
Peter
--
lichtblitz PHOTOGRAPHY
Hochzeitsfotograf: http://fotograf-24.com/
Fotoblog: http://fotograf-24.com/fotoblog/
Fotostudio: http://lichtblitz.eu

[notbob]

On 2013-05-10, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> Yes, it installed OK on 512Mbye or RAM. i could even load and run
> firefox. But that was it. Any other program beyond firefox was swapping.
> Worse the disk caching was non-existent.
>
> I.e. the OS and GUI weren't the problem: the apps were.

Well, let's see. I have two users logged in. Both with a session of
libreoffice open, both surfing via seamonkey or firefox, multiple tabs
of konsole and one okular session. No problem. This on a 1.4 P4 box.
Perhaps cuz I'm running fluxbox WM and not kde/xfce or some other
bloatfest. Oh, I do have full kde installed, I jes don't run its
crappy DE, thereby killing stingy, ohsonasty, and neopuke, resource
hogs in the first degree. Nothing takes "an age" except perhaps
dwnlding via my not-so-wide band DSL.

Beats the crap outta spending an extra thousand dollars jes to save a
few seconds. ;)

nb

[notbob]

On 2013-05-10, Stef <n...@this.address.com> wrote:

> The book I started with was RUNNING LINUX (O'Reilly, pub.), but even the
> latest edition, I think the 5th, is 8 years out of date.

Me too, but not a good book, IMO. Goes along fine for a couple
chapters, then suddenly uses some linux terms a newb is totally
ignorant of, like the reader knows what the author is talking about.
Fine if one has another box online to google the info. Not so fine if
the reader doesn't. I tossed mine yrs ago.

nb

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/05/13 14:49, lichtblitz wrote:
> Peter Percival wrote:
>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
>> an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
>> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
>> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
>> download will be gratefully received.
> It depends on your computer know-how. If don't have much of it and you want to
> go easy on you try try either Ubuntu or Mint. For the first install choose a
> 32-bit release unless you got more than 4GB ram in your notebook. I'd would
> also go for the LTS-realease (Long Time Support)

64 bit runs fine in 1GB.

> Cheers
> Peter

[The Natural Philosopher]

I know what you mean, but didn't know why you would consider that a
suitable epithet...?

[unruh]

On 2013-05-10, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 04:19 PM, unruh wrote:
>> On 2013-05-09, Peter Percival <peterxp...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
>>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
>>> an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
>>> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
>>> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
>>> download will be gratefully received.
>>
>> To try it, download a "live" version and burn it to Cd. Now, one of the
>> key problem sis that it will be very slow to boot up (Cds are slow). and
>> preserving changes is hard.
>> You can certainly use it on both.
>> Mageia One version 2 is what I used. but there are loads of options out
>> there.
>
> as most everyone advises a live-cd is a good way to eyeball what linux
> is about, just remember that it will be FAR from a comprehensive revelation

Of course not. But then living with a distro for a year is a far more
comprehensive revelation, but that makes the decision making pretty
protracted.

>
> here's one place to evaluate initial popularity (with links)
>

> http://doistrowatch.com/?newsid=07273

As always popularity does not necessarily mean that it fits you. You
should tell us what it is you want from your distro-- what do you use
computers for ( or what do you envision using them for). You are a naive
newbie, but what is your attitude to solving puzzles, to tracking down
issues.

[Peter Percival]

Dan Espen wrote:

> Peter Percival <peterxp...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>> to download will be gratefully received.
>

> Any distro should work.
> Ubuntu and Fedora are popular.
>
> You can use the same CD for different machines.
> You don't even have to install,

That is what I want to do: not install. (Alternately, that is what I
want not to do: install.)

> just insert the CD and reboot.
> Linux will run right from the CD.
>

[Peter Percival]

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:

>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>> to download will be gratefully received.

> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look

That's one thing against it then!

> and feel but you
> need a GB of RAM.
>
> download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so install

> it. It wont mash windows in the process..
>

[Peter Percival]

Stef wrote:
> Peter Percival wrote:
>
>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
>> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download

>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, [...]

> Remember: Linux isn't Windows.

Excellent!

[J G Miller]

On Friday, May 10th, 2013, at 13:49:09h +0000, Licht Blitz suggested:

> If don't have much of it and you want to go easy on you try try

> either Ubuntu ...

Why do you disregard the sage advice of Richard Matthew Stallman,
the founder of the GNU software project and a pioneer of the free
software movement?

From <http://www.fsf.ORG/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do>

QUOTE

December 7th, 2012 at 01:55h

Ubuntu, a widely used and influential GNU/Linux distribution,
has installed surveillance code.

...

If you ever recommend or redistribute GNU/Linux,
please remove Ubuntu from the distros you recommend
or redistribute.

UNQUOTE

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 10/05/13 16:50, Peter Percival wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>>> to download will be gratefully received.
>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look
>
> That's one thing against it then!
>

OK, there's a data point. What don't you like about XP that you hope a
linux system will solve?

Remember all the distros are a similar core, similar if not the same
apps, with really just a different level of utilities and most
importantly a window manager /desktop environment that defines the GUI
look and feel.

If you dont look under the hood the most important thing will be
installation ease and look and feel. If you DO look under the hood these
things are almost irrelevant, because you can in principle change them
with greater or less pain.

[Robert Heller]

At Fri, 10 May 2013 15:48:41 +0100 The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>
> On 10/05/13 14:49, lichtblitz wrote:
> > Peter Percival wrote:
> >> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
> >> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
> >> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
> >> an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
> >> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
> >> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
> >> download will be gratefully received.
> > It depends on your computer know-how. If don't have much of it and you want to
> > go easy on you try try either Ubuntu or Mint. For the first install choose a
> > 32-bit release unless you got more than 4GB ram in your notebook. I'd would
> > also go for the LTS-realease (Long Time Support)
> 64 bit runs fine in 1GB.

Sure -- I even have some 64-bit VMs with only 1gig (they are build boxes). It
is just that with < 4gig of RAM, 64-bit is overkill, esp if it is just a test
drive -- the OP only really needs to burn one 32-bit Live CD/DVD for test
drive purposes.

>
> > Cheers
> > Peter
>
>

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Stef]

At the time I got my copy, the 3rd Edition, in June 2000, it was the
best around. I'm sure by now there are "better" books, but I haven't
checked in years.

I never came across any terms that weren't defined or explained
somewhere in the book. But then I was coming from the Amiga
not Windows. Different knowledge base. And being an Amiga user for
years, I was accustomed to having to solve problems on my own.

I still use my copy as a reference. The command line stuff never seems
to change.

Stef

[notbob]

On 2013-05-10, Stef <n...@this.address.com> wrote:

> I still use my copy as a reference. The command line stuff never seems
> to change.

I did learn a couple things from that book, like how to unpack a tar
archive and create a symlink. But, I think a better one for newbs is
The Linux Command Line by William Shotts. It was a website,
initially. http://linuxcommand.org/

Then perhaps this site:

http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/linux-how-to-compile-program.html

Those were enough to get me off fickle RH to Slackware, where I happily
reside to this very day. ;)

nb

[Dirk Weber]

Op 09-05-13 21:09, Peter Percival schreef:

> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
> and I have a broadband internet connection.

Congratulations. Seems to be a nice machine (no, I am definitevely no
hardware expert). And a broadband internet connection makes life so much
easier (we only have something like that for a bot more than a year
now). Both together are a good start to begin with Linux.

> May I download
> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
> an elderly Windows XP computer?

As far as I know there are no countries where this might be forbidden
(North Korea, Iran?). Linux is open source (see Wikipedia for this or
other expressions, there you will find a lot of informations).

> Even if I can't use the same CD on both
> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook.

Well, I am here the "sysadmin" of four Linux pcs. Two are 64bit pcs, one
is a 32bit pc which serves as fileserver and then we have this elder
32bit FSC Lifebook which I now have in the sleeping room to be used as
internet radio.

The 64bit pcs rund with Debian Wheezy 64bit (will soon be updated to
Debian testing 64bit), the fileserver runs with Debian Wheezy 32bit and
the laptop runs with AntiX which is a Debian testing derivate.

> I know nothing about
> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
> download will be gratefully received.

It is ok if you have no idea yet of Linux. Most of us had no ideas of MS
Windows when we started with that (or of MS DOS such as me). You have
one big advantage: You do speak English, this is the lingua franca in
the computer world.

And you are not only interested - you also must be very brave. Otherwise
you would not have posted this question about the recommende
distribution here.

:-)

This question is of nearly religious meaning. If you have a look at
www.distrowatch.org you will see that they list a bit more than 300
different distributions. No easy choice indeed.

There are differences of course (try the search filters on distrowatch).
There are distris for general usage and there are distris for more or
less specialized usage. There are distris with many localisations and
there are distris which only come in one language. There are distris
which are strictly non-commercial and there are distris which are very
commercial.

So what can you do with that?

First of all: Do you know somebody who might be willing to help you
(face to face that is) and who is more or less content with his
distribution? If so, ask him for support in installing and maybe the
first steps.

You will have to do all by yourself - later. For the beginning is is
very nice to have a helping friend. Might be a fine bbq or a cradle of
good (German?) beer might be a good reward.

:-)

No friend of that kind? Still want to go on trying Linux?

In that case I would suggest you decide for one of the bigger
distributions. Chances then are the best that they are user friendly
(absolutely most distris are this nowadays) and you will find answers to
even the oddest questions which you cannot solve yourself (for example
by posting them here).

A very good idea may be to download a live version of several distris
(find them with help of distrowatch). They all are Linux, that is for
true, but they all are more or less different from each other. Different
software included, different graphical user interfaces per default or
even to choose. Some are somehow "fat", some are "slim". Some work
faster, some slower. But take in regard that a live distri may work much
slower that a distri installed on your hard disc.

You will find quite a lot of answers in this thread and many of them
will praise the author's favourite distri. This should be no surprise,
with Linux you have the freedom to use that distri you like the most.
And this judgement of course also has a subjective component (wich imho
is absolutely ok) which does not make the choice easier for you.

But read all the arguments and try to get an impression. If you find a
discussion weird or too academic, just leave it out. (Maybe some people
will now call for my blood).

:-)

Then just start. Find out which meanings apply to your experiences and
which not, and get an own feeling for one or another distri. If you take
care of a reliable data backup before (!!) installing a Linux distri
(which includes formatting the hard discs during the procedure) you will
not need too much time for this. But you will learn a lot about your
computer (very interesting, believe me) and also about yourself (did you
know that there are cases recorded of people who shot their computer?).

And: Please don't smoke when installing, it is unhealthy. Better have a
good beer or wine afterwards, good coffee or tea also will do the job.
Don't ennerve your partner with this business except he/she is also
interested in this matter.

Thus: Have fun.

Ok, you asked for that: I started with MS DOS, then MS Windows 98, later
I worked in the office with a stone age era Apple Macintosh, still later
Windows XP. All of these not too bad at their time.

My first steps with Linux were with SuSE Linux (well, I live in Germany
and SuSE was very popular under Linux users here). Used that for several
years. Then tried Fedora and Ubuntu. Finally I came to Debian which I
now am using for some five years or so. I did it with KDE, GNOME, XFCE,
BLACKBOX, ICEWM and now with MATE as gui.

Personally I am sure that Debian nowadays is very user friendly
(especially the installer is much better than some years ago when it was
a nuisance). There are several versions of which "stable" indeed is rock
stable and "testing" is also very stable (personally I never had any
problems with testing during the last four years). Stable is imho
recommandable for servers where the software is not necessarily to be on
the development's edge (security updates are provided very fast for
stable, thus this is no problem with Debian stable). Testing I would
recommend for workstations (also for productional use) where the
software should be state of the art (for example: Actual version of
Libre Office). Debian is available as live distribution. But be aware of
what I said before: All this is my personal meaning, I am no os guru.

Groetjes uit Arft,

Dirk

--
D. Weber, Arft, Germany (50°22'56"N 07°05'01"E)
If possible, no html mails please
jabber me

[lichtblitz]

Robert Heller wrote:


>> 64 bit runs fine in 1GB.
>
> Sure -- I even have some 64-bit VMs with only 1gig (they are build boxes).
> It is just that with < 4gig of RAM, 64-bit is overkill,

Overkill indeed, especially that the 32-bit kernel can address the the whole
< 4GB at least on en EFI-Board and btw. utilizes less RAM. Nevertheless with
exact 4GB RAM on board I always use 64-bit kernel.

[lichtblitz]

J G Miller wrote:
> On Friday, May 10th, 2013, at 13:49:09h +0000, Licht Blitz suggested:
>
>> If don't have much of it and you want to go easy on you try try
>> either Ubuntu ...

> If you ever recommend or redistribute GNU/Linux,
> please remove Ubuntu from the distros you recommend
> or redistribute.

Why so? It is still GNU/Linux not Windows:
sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping

[Richard Kettlewell]

lichtblitz <nos...@lichtblitz.invalid> writes:
> Robert Heller wrote:

>>> 64 bit runs fine in 1GB.
>>
>> Sure -- I even have some 64-bit VMs with only 1gig (they are build boxes).
>> It is just that with < 4gig of RAM, 64-bit is overkill,
>
> Overkill indeed, especially that the 32-bit kernel can address the the whole
> < 4GB at least on en EFI-Board and btw. utilizes less RAM. Nevertheless with
> exact 4GB RAM on board I always use 64-bit kernel.

RAM size isn’t the only issue, or necessarily much of an issue at all.
The important things that running a 64-bit kernel enables are increased
address space within a process and additional, wider registers.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Jean-David Beyer]

On 05/10/2013 02:20 PM, lichtblitz wrote:
> Robert Heller wrote:
>
>
>>> 64 bit runs fine in 1GB.
>> Sure -- I even have some 64-bit VMs with only 1gig (they are build boxes).
>> It is just that with < 4gig of RAM, 64-bit is overkill,
> Overkill indeed, especially that the 32-bit kernel can address the the whole
> < 4GB at least on en EFI-Board and btw. utilizes less RAM. Nevertheless with
> exact 4GB RAM on board I always use 64-bit kernel.
>
> Cheers
> Peter

I used to run RHEL 5 (32-bit) on a machine with 8GBytes of RAM. The chip
set (PAE) was such that no single user process could use more than 4
GBytes of RAM, but the kernel could, since it could access the memory
mapping registers. The kernel could not use more than 4 GBytes at any
one time for executing itself, but it could use the space for buffers,
which it did.

[J G Miller]

On Friday, May 10th, 2013 at 18:29:12h +0000, Licht Blitz asked:

> Why so?

Read the full article for which I provided the link
and you will learn the reason why RMS says so.

> sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping

You also forgot to mention removing the zeitgeist spyware.

[Octothorpe]

Now that you bring it up........I think your on to something

[Aragorn]

On Friday 10 May 2013 20:20, lichtblitz conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

> Robert Heller wrote:
>
>>> 64 bit runs fine in 1GB.
>>
>> Sure -- I even have some 64-bit VMs with only 1gig (they are build
>> boxes). It is just that with < 4gig of RAM, 64-bit is overkill,
>
> Overkill indeed, especially that the 32-bit kernel can address the the

> whole < 4GB at least on en EFI-Board [...

EFI has nothing to do with that. All 32-bit operating systems have a 4
GiB address space. However, when the machine has more than ~3.2 GiB of
RAM, then chances are that the RAM above that barrier will be obscured
by the PCI address space, depending on how many legacy PCI devices you
have in your system.

Rationale: PCI devices are accessed by way of an address space,
logically mapped from the top of the 32-bit 4 GiB address
space downward. As memory addresses cannot be assigned to
more than one purpose, the RAM behind that address space is
then obscured. On hardware which supports PAE and with a
PAE-enabled kernel, the obscured RAM can be remapped to an
address space above the 4 GiB barrier, as PAE allows for
36-bit memory addressing and thus up to 64 GiB of RAM, in
pages of 3 GiB for each userspace process (plus 1 GiB for
the kernel address space).

> ...] and btw. utilizes less RAM.

The surplus cost in RAM consumption of running a 64-bit system versus
running a 32-bit system is highly overrated, albeit that I will agree
that with only 1 GiB of RAM installed in the machine, any modern 64-bit
distribution is going to feel quite asphyxiated, and the machine's going
to be doing lots of swapping.

I wouldn't recommend going with 64-bit on any machine with less than 2
GiB RAM. But then again, even though it's possible, I wouldn't
recommend running any modern 32-bit distribution with less than 2 GiB of
RAM anymore either, especially not with a heavyweight graphical user
interface such as KDE 4, GNOME 3 or even present-day XFCE - which is
also built on the GTK+ libraries, like GNOME.

With only limited RAM available, I definitely recommend a lightweight
window manager, e.g. FluxBox/BlackBox/OpenBox, WindowMaker, or something
similar.

> Nevertheless with exact 4GB RAM on board I always use 64-bit kernel.

With 4 GiB installed in the machine, if you have any PCIe devices in
your system, then that is the sane thing to do, as their address space
will be mapped above the 4 GiB barrier, leaving more accessible RAM
available below the 4 GiB mark.

[Stef]

notbob wrote:

> On 2013-05-10, Stef <n...@this.address.com> wrote:
>
>> I still use my copy as a reference. The command line stuff never seems
>> to change.
>
> I did learn a couple things from that book, like how to unpack a tar
> archive and create a symlink. But, I think a better one for newbs is
> The Linux Command Line by William Shotts. It was a website,
> initially. http://linuxcommand.org/

I wouldn't want to even hint to a Windows-to-Linux newbie that there's a
command line. Let them come across it naturally in the course of
learning Linux. Less trauma that way. ;-)

> Then perhaps this site:
>
> http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/linux-how-to-compile-program.html
>
> Those were enough to get me off fickle RH to Slackware, where I happily
> reside to this very day. ;)

I spent a lot of time at www.tldp.org, The Linux Documentation Project.

Stef

[Michael Black]

On Sat, 11 May 2013, Stef wrote:

> notbob wrote:
>
>> On 2013-05-10, Stef <n...@this.address.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I still use my copy as a reference. The command line stuff never seems
>>> to change.
>>
>> I did learn a couple things from that book, like how to unpack a tar
>> archive and create a symlink. But, I think a better one for newbs is
>> The Linux Command Line by William Shotts. It was a website,
>> initially. http://linuxcommand.org/
>
> I wouldn't want to even hint to a Windows-to-Linux newbie that there's a
> command line. Let them come across it naturally in the course of
> learning Linux. Less trauma that way. ;-)
>

It suddenly struck me earlier today when reading this thread that enough
time has gone by that people have grown up with computers where WIndows is
the operating system.

There was a time when people stuck to Microsoft operating systems, but
they did have a command line, and then eventually could run Windows on top
of it. But MS-DOS has now receded enough into the past that that's not
the case.

I guess I was thinking of the distinction between being experienced with
computers and being experienced with Linux. I had no problems using
Slackware out of the box, starting in 2001, despite all the comments about
how it's for "advanced" users or whatever is said. But I'd had over 20
years of using computers before that, starting with a computer that had no
video or ascii keyboard connected to it. There was a time when people did
have command line history even if they hadn't been using Unix or Linux,
that's no longer so true.

Michael

[Jean-David Beyer]

I have a machine that has two 550 MHz Pentium III processors, 512 Meg of
RAM, 3 hard drives, a few PCI devices (sound board, ethernet board, two
SCSI controllers, ...) and it runs fine with CentOS 5 (32 bit) on it
usually running GNOME. Those processors are a little slow by todays
standards. I keep it only because it works just fine. I mainly run BOINC
processes on it, and it does not swap. On the other hand, sometimes one
of the BOINC processes is swapped out (no thrashing) waiting for memory.
But that kind of swapping happens only about every 90 minutes. I did not
dare try CentOS 6 on it though. As I use it now, it does not really need
a sound board, or one of the SCSI controllers (CD-ROM
reader-burner).When I bought it, it came with Red Hat Linux 5.0 and was
soon upgraded to Red Hat Linux 5.2. The last Red Hat Linux I ran it with
was Red Hat Linux 7.3 that was a very good distribution. It never
thrashed. It was my main computer for at least 4 years.

But I would not BUY a machine like that today, and if I did, I suppose I
would have more memory in it. Also, I doubt I could get processors as
slow as those anymore. But it works just fine as a backup computer. I
used to dual boot it with Windows XP in it that I needed only to do my
income tax. I bought the machine new in early 2000.

My "new" machine has 8 GBytes RAM and runs x86_64 Red Hat Enterprise
Linux 6 on it. It has a slow 4-core Xeon in it. It could have two Xeon
processors and something like 384 GBytes of RAM, but I do not need that
kind of computer anymore. But the motherboard is ready if I ever did.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-11, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:

> have command line history even if they hadn't been using Unix or Linux,
> that's no longer so true.

This is the paradox I keep pointing out. You say ppl today are not
command line savvy, yet they can text with their thumb almost as fast
as I can touch type. Txting on cell phones and posting on twitter are
text centric, yet ppl quail before a command line. It's crazy.

Granted, I was introduced to Microsoft with PC-DOS, plus I touch type,
so I'm no stranger to the CLI. In fact, I despise the mouse. Hate
having to reach for it. In everything but graphics, it's a drag.
But, it has its place.

People are hung up on GUIz and the mouse merely cuz they're lazy, not
stupid. They learned the mouse and it's enough, so leave 'em alone.
People are militant about their laziness. "I don't want to learn a
quicker way!" Makes 'em feel stupid. "I LIKE my mouse!!". Fine. I
say let 'em stew in their ignorance. No skin off my arse. ;)

nb

[J G Miller]

On Saturday, May 11th, 2013, at 12:49:35h +0000, Not BoB observed:

> People are hung up on GUIz and the mouse merely cuz they're lazy, not
> stupid. They learned the mouse and it's enough, so leave 'em alone.
> People are militant about their laziness. "I don't want to learn a
> quicker way!" Makes 'em feel stupid. "I LIKE my mouse!!".

Well said NotBoB.

There is a poster with just that attitude who infests
the Ubuntu and Mint newsgroups.

My feeling is that people should be required to know a few
command line commands before they start using a GUI.

[Aragorn]

On Saturday 11 May 2013 14:56, J G Miller conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

> On Saturday, May 11th, 2013, at 12:49:35h +0000, Not BoB observed:
>
>> People are hung up on GUIz and the mouse merely cuz they're lazy, not
>> stupid. They learned the mouse and it's enough, so leave 'em alone.
>> People are militant about their laziness. "I don't want to learn a
>> quicker way!" Makes 'em feel stupid. "I LIKE my mouse!!".
>
> Well said NotBoB.
>
> There is a poster with just that attitude who infests
> the Ubuntu and Mint newsgroups.

A letter-spaced one... ;-)

> My feeling is that people should be required to know a few
> command line commands before they start using a GUI.

And that they shouldn't be _afraid_ of using a command line.

[notbob]

On 2013-05-11, Aragorn <thor...@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:

> On Saturday 11 May 2013 14:56, J G Miller conveyed the following to

>> My feeling is that people should be required to know a few
>> command line commands before they start using a GUI.

> And that they shouldn't be _afraid_ of using a command line.

Too true!

Sometimes, it's the only solution. I can't count the number of times
I've had to go into whatever is passing for DOS, these days, and use
the command line to bail out some poor windoze schlep that's got his
system all bolloxed. Sometimes that GUI jes refuses to do its job and
ya' gotta haul out the old tried/true-ware to whip the system back in
line. I always have some bootable DOS or shell media ready to throw
at a hosed box. Often, it's the only way.

Even on linux. I recall a dual boot system I was trying clean up.
Even cfdisk wouldn't work. Hadda go back to rudimentary fdisk to
remove a couple stubborn ext2 partitions. Once you get the hang of
CLI, it's really pretty handy. Besides, I can still read it with
these old geezer eyeballs, which is why I use slrn instead of pan or
knode and emacs for my file mgr/editor. Gimme big ol' green letters
on a black background, anytime. ;)

nb

[Jean-David Beyer]

On 05/11/2013 10:14 AM, notbob wrote:
> [snip]Even on linux. I recall a dual boot system I was trying clean

> up. Even cfdisk wouldn't work. Hadda go back to rudimentary fdisk to
> remove a couple stubborn ext2 partitions. Once you get the hang of
> CLI, it's really pretty handy. Besides, I can still read it with these
> old geezer eyeballs, which is why I use slrn instead of pan or knode
> and emacs for my file mgr/editor. Gimme big ol' green letters on a
> black background, anytime. ;) nb

Sometimes, too, a very short shell script can do what would require an
eternity of shell scripting to accomplish.

And at the risk of starting a flame war, while I prefer the emacs for
almost everything, once in a while, I use vi because a one-liner of
regular expression will do the job that takes me longer with emacs. I
admit I am not an emacs expert; I do not use it for my email reader, for
example.

[Jean-David Beyer]

On 05/11/2013 10:30 AM, Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> On 05/11/2013 10:14 AM, notbob wrote:
>> [snip]Even on linux. I recall a dual boot system I was trying clean
>> up. Even cfdisk wouldn't work. Hadda go back to rudimentary fdisk to
>> remove a couple stubborn ext2 partitions. Once you get the hang of
>> CLI, it's really pretty handy. Besides, I can still read it with these
>> old geezer eyeballs, which is why I use slrn instead of pan or knode
>> and emacs for my file mgr/editor. Gimme big ol' green letters on a
>> black background, anytime. ;) nb
> Sometimes, too, a very short shell script can do what would require an
> eternity of shell scripting to accomplish.

I meant pointing and clicking...

[Michael Black]

Some of the neatest things about unix/linux are the tiny little utilities
that do only one thing, but do something valuable. I use cal all the
time, it wouldn't be improved as a GUI. It's always important to note that
at least some of the GUI programs are merely interfaces to command line
programs, the very versatility of the command line allowing easy interface
to a GUI cover.

Michael

[Robert Riches]

On 2013-05-11, Jean-David Beyer <jeand...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 05/11/2013 10:30 AM, Jean-David Beyer wrote:
>> On 05/11/2013 10:14 AM, notbob wrote:
>>> [snip]Even on linux. I recall a dual boot system I was trying clean
>>> up. Even cfdisk wouldn't work. Hadda go back to rudimentary fdisk to
>>> remove a couple stubborn ext2 partitions. Once you get the hang of
>>> CLI, it's really pretty handy. Besides, I can still read it with these
>>> old geezer eyeballs, which is why I use slrn instead of pan or knode
>>> and emacs for my file mgr/editor. Gimme big ol' green letters on a
>>> black background, anytime. ;) nb
>> Sometimes, too, a very short shell script can do what would require an
>> eternity of shell scripting to accomplish.
>
> I meant pointing and clicking...

Ahhh, yes; how true. A few years ago, while employed in a
temporary assignment developing software, I worked under a lead
developer who was a _VERY_ big fan of the "Micro$oft Way". I
didn't realize it was a M$-only shop until the job was underway.

One day, we had imported a source code tree from another group in
the company and needed to look at it in Visual Studio. The tree
had files with names something like ".svn", one in each
directory. Visual Studio wouldn't accept the files, because it
said they were under version control. So, we needed to delete
all of those ".svn" files. The lead brought up M$'s file mangler
and started browsing. When he found a target file, he deleted
it, found another, deleted it, etc. With dozens or hundreds of
such files, it was going to take a terribly long time.

After I detected he was getting frustrated with the slowness of
his method, I mustered all the verbal humility I could (to reduce
risk of being fired for offending the lead developer) and said,
"If you'd like, I can delete all of them in 20 seconds." He
clicked on a few more and then told me to do it. I brought up a
Cygwin xterm, went to the root directory of the tree in question,
did "find . -name ...", visually scanned to make sure the command
was working as I had intended, and then did "rm `!!`". There
were maybe a couple of directories with spaces in their names, so
that simple substitution didn't work. However, in about 20
seconds enough of the ".svn" files were gone so we could do what
we needed.

--
Robert Riches
spamt...@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[Peter Percival]

Peter Percival wrote:
> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows 7,
> and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_ on
> an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on both
> machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing about
> Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux to
> download will be gratefully received.

Thank you for all replies (which will take some time to digest),
meanwhile I'm downloading Tails 0.17.2.

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
...

> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel

Really?

I installed Mint last week, and it looks and feels exactly the same
as my previous Mandriva system. That would be true no matter what
distro I installed.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson, <http://cfajohnson.com>
Author:
Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/05/13 18:51, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> ...
>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel
> Really?
>
> I installed Mint last week, and it looks and feels exactly the same
> as my previous Mandriva system. That would be true no matter what
> distro I installed.
>

Didn't know mandriva had Maya desktop env.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On 2013-05-14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 14/05/13 18:51, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>> On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> ...
>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel
>> Really?
>>
>> I installed Mint last week, and it looks and feels exactly the same
>> as my previous Mandriva system. That would be true no matter what
>> distro I installed.
>>
> Didn't know mandriva had Maya desktop env.

You can install whatever you like on any distro.

I use WindowMaker which is available in every distro I've looked
at.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 14/05/13 22:49, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2013-05-14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 14/05/13 18:51, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>>> On 2013-05-09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look and feel
>>> Really?
>>>
>>> I installed Mint last week, and it looks and feels exactly the same
>>> as my previous Mandriva system. That would be true no matter what
>>> distro I installed.
>>>
>> Didn't know mandriva had Maya desktop env.
> You can install whatever you like on any distro.

you can spray a car any colour you like too, but the point of distros is
you dont have to.

> I use WindowMaker which is available in every distro I've looked
> at.
>


--

[Peter Percival]

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 10/05/13 16:50, Peter Percival wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:

>>> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same CD on
>>>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>>>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which Linux
>>>> to download will be gratefully received.

>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look
>>

>> That's one thing against it then!
>>
>
> OK, there's a data point. What don't you like about XP that you hope a
> linux system will solve?

Actually, I misspoke: it's XP (and most things MS Windows) that I don't
like, rather than the _look_ of XP. What I don't like about MS Windows
is that it has its own way of doing things (that's ok) and that it makes
it very difficult for the user (who, after all, has paid for the blasted
thing) to do things as he wishes (which is far from ok).

> Remember all the distros are a similar core, similar if not the same
> apps, with really just a different level of utilities and most
> importantly a window manager /desktop environment that defines the GUI
> look and feel.
>
> If you dont look under the hood the most important thing will be
> installation ease and look and feel. If you DO look under the hood these
> things are almost irrelevant, because you can in principle change them
> with greater or less pain.

I expect to look.

>

[J G Miller]

On Wednesday, May 15th, 2013, at 16:27:47h +0100, Peter Percival explained:

> What I don't like about MS Windows is that it has its own way of doing
> things (that's ok) and that it makes it very difficult for the user
> (who, after all, has paid for the blasted thing) to do things as he
> wishes (which is far from ok).

Not forgetting the DRM (Digital Restrictions Management)
added to the software ...

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 15/05/13 16:27, Peter Percival wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 10/05/13 16:50, Peter Percival wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 09/05/13 20:09, Peter Percival wrote:
>>>>> I am the proud owner of an Acer Aspire A5-4 notebook running Windows
>>>>> 7, and I have a broadband internet connection. May I download
>>>>> some-Linux-or-other, burn it on to a CD to use on my note book, _and_
>>>>> on an elderly Windows XP computer? Even if I can't use the same
>>>>> CD on
>>>>> both machines, I would like to try it on the notebook. I know nothing
>>>>> about Linux or computers in general, so recommendations of which
>>>>> Linux
>>>>> to download will be gratefully received.
>>>> linux mint is probably the closest to a windows XP look
>>>
>>> That's one thing against it then!
>>>
>>
>> OK, there's a data point. What don't you like about XP that you hope a
>> linux system will solve?
>
> Actually, I misspoke: it's XP (and most things MS Windows) that I
> don't like, rather than the _look_ of XP. What I don't like about MS
> Windows is that it has its own way of doing things (that's ok) and
> that it makes it very difficult for the user (who, after all, has paid
> for the blasted thing) to do things as he wishes (which is far from ok).
>

well yes. I never went further with XP than a way to simply load and
run windows based applications.

What I meant about mint, is that the Maya desktop has a sort of 'main
menu' button, task bars and the ability to easily make clickable
programme launches on the desktop and a more or less windows like
(gnome) way of configuring things that makes it easy to transition to
if you are used to XP.

>> Remember all the distros are a similar core, similar if not the same
>> apps, with really just a different level of utilities and most
>> importantly a window manager /desktop environment that defines the GUI
>> look and feel.
>>
>> If you dont look under the hood the most important thing will be
>> installation ease and look and feel. If you DO look under the hood these
>> things are almost irrelevant, because you can in principle change them
>> with greater or less pain.
>
> I expect to look.

MMM. in which case you will find the differences are more or less cosmetic.
I.e. it is in theory possible to get the Debian->ubuntu->mint distro to
run half a dozen window managers but the underlying non windows env. is
all the same really.

All I can say is 'out of the box' I found Mint to be roughly what I
wanted - a gnome 2 environment done better. so menus and so on are more
or less where they are expected.

and under the hood its debian/ubuntu., so config files are more or less
where expected.

But I actually did less with mint than debian stable, largely because
debian stable as SO far behind the leading edge I was always having to
add custom hacks to deal with hardware and so on. I.e I was finding that
the apps on debian stable were full of bugs THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN FIXED
UPSTREAM..

so it made a good server, but a lousy desktop.

Ubuntu takes IIRC debian unstable or testing - can't remember which -
and fixes the bugs AT the leading edge. So at least the applications are
up to snuff.

So I would have gone Ubuntu, except gnome 3 and/or Unity were vile.
hated them.

Mint Maya gave me a gnome2 plus experience. Not perhaps the greatest
desktop of all time, but close enough to what I was used to. It works
for me anyway. And I don't CARE that much about desktops. As long as
there are things to click to launch programs and otherwise its fairly
bare, that's good enough for me.

The one are it was dire was stock video playing tools. I tried them all
and ended up with kaffeine and VLC..neither of which is perfect, but
each does a job. The old Gnome Totem media player is total junk ...

..

[The Natural Philosopher]

exactly so.

In the end the nice thing about modern linux is that it odes usually
load and install into a perfectly workable windows like environment,
albeit one that doesn't blue screen or crash - BUT that's a starting
point for adjusting it further, which is all possible. Unlikewindows.

[J G Miller]

On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:46:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> In the end the nice thing about modern linux is that it odes usually
> load and install into a perfectly workable windows like environment,
> albeit one that doesn't blue screen or crash

I would beg to differ about that "doesn't crash" assertion.

It used to be with slow stable development with xfree86 that the
X11 server was rock solid, but nowadays with Xorg rapid "let the
user do the beta testing", just scrolling the mouse in Firefox can
cause the whole system to lock up.

EQ overflowing ...

[The Natural Philosopher]

well you should install a decent stable distro :)

>
> EQ overflowing ...

[Robert Heller]

This is basically true of almost *all* the (Linux) *Desktop* managers,
starting with Gnome and KDE.


--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Dan Espen]

Must be true of only certain distros. There are distros designed to
be very stable, and leading edge distros. I always thought Fedora
was leading edge, but I haven't experienced any stability issues after
many years.

Maybe if I was updating from development repositories.

--
Dan Espen

[Robert Heller]

Only if you use beta test / bleeding edge versions. My CentOS 5.9 system is
quite rock solid:

sauron.deepsoft.com% rpm -qf /usr/lib64/libX11.so*
libX11-devel-1.0.3-11.el5_7.1
libX11-1.0.3-11.el5_7.1
libX11-1.0.3-11.el5_7.1

and from /var/log/Xorg.0.log:

X Window System Version 7.1.1
Release Date: 12 May 2006
X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0, Release 7.1.1
Build Operating System: Linux 2.6.18-308.24.1.el5 x86_64 Red Hat, Inc.
Current Operating System: Linux sauron.deepsoft.com 2.6.18-348.3.1.el5xen #1
SMP Mon Mar 11 20:28:48 EDT 2013 x86_64
Build Date: 09 January 2013
Build ID: xorg-x11-server 1.1.1-48.100.el5
..
(II) LoadModule: "vesa"
(II) Loading /usr/lib64/xorg/modules/drivers/vesa_drv.so
(II) Module vesa: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
compiled for 7.1.1, module version = 1.3.0
Module class: X.Org Video Driver
ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 1.0

>
> EQ overflowing ...

[The Natural Philosopher]

not gnome3 or I think Unity.

[J G Miller]

On Wednesday, May 15th, 2013, at 14:52:35h -0400, Dan Espen wondered:

> Must be true of only certain distros.

Including Fedora.

<https://duckduckgo.COM/?q=fedora+eq+overflowing>

[Jean-David Beyer]

When I first started running Linux (Red Hat Linux 5.0, 5.2, 6.various,
the window stuff would lock up sometimes. Luckily, I could usually get
in from my other machine, using ssh, abd kill the X window system and
restart it.

Starting with Red Hat Linux 7.3, I never had a problem.

I never had a problem with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3, CentOS 4, Red Hat
Enterprise Linux 5, CentOS 5, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.

To be fair, I never had a problem with Windows XP or Windows 7. I had
nothing but trouble with Windows 95. But strating with Windows XP, I
never run anything except income tax programs.

[Aragorn]

On Thursday 16 May 2013 07:01, Jean-David Beyer conveyed the following
to comp.os.linux.misc...

> On 05/15/2013 02:15 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:46:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> In the end the nice thing about modern linux is that it odes usually
>>> load and install into a perfectly workable windows like
>>> environment, albeit one that doesn't blue screen or crash
>> I would beg to differ about that "doesn't crash" assertion.
>>
>> It used to be with slow stable development with xfree86 that the
>> X11 server was rock solid, but nowadays with Xorg rapid "let the
>> user do the beta testing", just scrolling the mouse in Firefox can
>> cause the whole system to lock up.
>>
>> EQ overflowing ...
>
> When I first started running Linux (Red Hat Linux 5.0, 5.2, 6.various,
> the window stuff would lock up sometimes. Luckily, I could usually get
> in from my other machine, using ssh, abd kill the X window system and
> restart it.

You guys are aware of the "magic SysRq" keys, aren't you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_sysrq

As long as the kernel is still alive, they will work, provided of course
that the kernel has been compiled with support for SysRq - which is the
case in most binary distributions - and that SysRq is enabled in the
system via /etc/sysctl.conf (via the line "kernel.sysrq=1").

Just mentioning that because a lot of people are inclined to think that
if X locks up for some reason, the whole system has gone belly up and
they need to press The Big Scary Button ™ on the computer housing. ;-)

[Bill Marcum]

On 05/10/2013 07:41 AM, Octothorpe wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 23:50:06 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 09/05/13 21:45, Octothorpe wrote:
>>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 20:48:48 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> download and burn the DVD, bootit and see if you like it: If so
>>>> install
>>> What's a boo tit?
>> i could tell you, butt hen I'd have to kill you.
> Ok first it is a boo tit and now it's a butt hen.
> Are the two related?
Ask a cow orker.

[Bill Marcum]

On 05/10/2013 08:04 AM, Jean-David Beyer wrote:
> On 05/10/2013 07:41 AM, Octothorpe wrote:

>> Are the two related?
> Yes; both are birds. A boo tit is a wild bird, and a butt hen is a
> domesticated one.
>
The boo tit lives up north. A Canadian can tell you all a boo tit.

[Jean-David Beyer]

On 05/16/2013 04:52 AM, Aragorn wrote:
> On Thursday 16 May 2013 07:01, Jean-David Beyer conveyed the following
> to comp.os.linux.misc...
>
>> On 05/15/2013 02:15 PM, J G Miller wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:46:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the end the nice thing about modern linux is that it odes usually
>>>> load and install into a perfectly workable windows like
>>>> environment, albeit one that doesn't blue screen or crash
>>> I would beg to differ about that "doesn't crash" assertion.
>>>
>>> It used to be with slow stable development with xfree86 that the
>>> X11 server was rock solid, but nowadays with Xorg rapid "let the
>>> user do the beta testing", just scrolling the mouse in Firefox can
>>> cause the whole system to lock up.
>>>
>>> EQ overflowing ...
>> When I first started running Linux (Red Hat Linux 5.0, 5.2, 6.various,
>> the window stuff would lock up sometimes. Luckily, I could usually get
>> in from my other machine, using ssh, abd kill the X window system and
>> restart it.
> You guys are aware of the "magic SysRq" keys, aren't you?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_sysrq

I used to know about that.

When X would lock up, I first tried Control-Alt-Backspace, but usually X
was so locked up it would not recognize that.
Then I would do Sys-Request-whatever and it would not recognize that
either. But since ssh would log in from my other machine, it seemed to
me that the kernel was up. And Sys-request would work fine when the
system was up.

It is always worth a try, but I am surprised anyone has trouble with X
window system these days.

[Octothorpe]

I would but I don't know what a cow orker is and how would one address it?

[Aragorn]

On Thursday 16 May 2013 15:32, Octothorpe conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

A cow orker is someone who turns cows into orks. Or orkses, depending
on whether you're talking to Gollem.

[John Hasler]

Aragorn writes:
> A cow orker is someone who turns cows into orks. Or orkses, depending
> on whether you're talking to Gollem.

I thought it was someone who orks cows.
--
John "We won't go into just what 'orking' might be" Hasler
jha...@newsguy.com
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

[The Natural Philosopher]

same as one adresses a ram chip

[The Natural Philosopher]

Or even Gollum.

[Octothorpe]

So your saying all this is Blizzards doing?

I wondered where Blizzard got all those orks, but why did they arm them?

[Octothorpe]

On Thu, 16 May 2013 09:27:36 -0500, John Hasler wrote:

> Aragorn writes:
>> A cow orker is someone who turns cows into orks. Or orkses, depending
>> on whether you're talking to Gollem.
>
> I thought it was someone who orks cows.

That sounds perverted.

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, May 16th, 2013, at 08:25:36h -0400, Jean-David Beyer wrote:

> but I am surprised anyone has trouble with X window system these days.

You must live a very sheltered life then. ;)

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well yes, perhaps we do. Not everybody who installs linux is actually
that interested in it as something to tinker with. Millions of users
slap in a noob distro like mint, discover they have a full office suite,
a browser, and email system, stuff to play videos on and listen to music
with and realise that they have all they actually need to USE a
desktop/laptop computer for less money than windows and about 10 times
the stability.

I admit to having issues with video drivers, but not with the x-windows
system AT ALL.

[J G Miller]

On Thursday, May 16th, 2013, at 20:33:19h +0100,

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I admit to having issues with video drivers, but not with the x-windows
> system AT ALL.

Good for you.

That in now way however negates the plethora of problems that
users do experience with the current version of the Xorg server
and particularly the [free] modules nouveau and radeon, and the
proprietary module from nVidia and fglrx from AMD.

[The Natural Philosopher]

those are the drivers..

[Jean-David Beyer]

Orking a cow is a recently discovered obscene act and may be punishable
by law.
Don't to it.

[Jean-David Beyer]

I do: I run Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and that stuff has always worked.