Monday, September 22, 2008

Re: [BLUG] New OS

Let me rephrase it -- if the bad memory block is mapped to the kernel
space, then it certainly will cause the OS to crash. If the same part
of the memory is mapped to the user space, probably it just caused some
program or programs to crash (or continue to run, depending on how the
area is used.) If it's just used to store couple variables, you might
just notice the program behaves strangely. You might not even notice
any problem if the variables are not used frequently. But if it's used
for memory address redirection, it might point to a la-la land and
causes the program to seg fault. Then again, if you are lucky enough,
it might be redirect to an address that does not do much harm. --SS
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am afraid that this is not a correct assumption. Different OSes has
>> different way of allocating/using memory. Probably it's just lucky that
>> Ubuntu had not touched the bad memory block. --SS
>>
>
> I most certainly concede "perhaps", as I definitely don't know what
> I'm talking about with any certainty.
>
> I find "probably" too strong a word, though.
>
> You see, I'm a memory hog and find myself regularly forcing Ubuntu to
> swap if I'm in a system with less than 2GB of memory.
>
> I played memory-intense 3-D games (Nexuiz, anyone?) and routinely ran
> the GIMP on many large photos at once, while keeping Firefox open with
> my customary zillion tabs.
>
> If Ubuntu didn't touch the bad memory blocks, I find design more
> probable than luck.
>
> Though I do concede that I don't really know what I'm talking about.
>
> Simón
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

I must apologize, but I feel that it may be a bad assumption to assume
that just because the problem sounds difficult that it hasn't been done.

Simón may not remember clearly, but at the time he was saying that
there was a single line in the kernel logs that made a reference to the
bad RAM.

Such a task doesn't even seem all that complex in theory. Presumably
Simón was using paritied RAM, (or some other type of RAM that can
signal errors). Such RAM throws an NMI (non-maskable interrupt) when an
error is encountered. Traditional OSes panic at this point. However,
there is no reason why it has to panic. You know where the error is now,
so turn off that RAM and keep going.

The theory of operation is sound. It doesn't require RAM to be scanned
before allocation. (If you clear the RAM when you allocate it, and catch
the error then, that should be good enough for the general case.)

More importantly, it is backed up with experience which fits. Simón
knows he worked his machine hard enough he was certain it wasn't the
RAM. I know Simón told me when he looked for it, he found a note in his
kernel log.

Cheers,
Steven Black

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:48:51PM -0400, Shei, Shing-Shong wrote:
> I am afraid that this is not a correct assumption. Different OSes has
> different way of allocating/using memory. Probably it's just lucky that
> Ubuntu had not touched the bad memory block. --SS
>
> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
> >> steered around them"? --SS
> >>
> >
> > I simply mean that with that particular stick of damaged memory I ran
> > Ubuntu perfectly fine without rebooting for several weeks, and with
> > the same damaged stick Windows XP couldn't even finish installing (or
> > boot when I got it installed using other memory).
> >
> > Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
> > kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
> >
> > Simón
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > BLUG mailing list
> > BLUG@linuxfan.com
> > http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E

RE: [BLUG] New OS

Some of the requirement question hinges on what you expect the box to do. I have a terminal server machine that does intranet DNS, SSH, and mail collection. I only connect to the machine from other machines, so it doesn't need to do anything with video. It runs on a Cyrix (think Pentium II) processor at 200MHz. It has 128MB of memory (I splurged). In total I'm using about 2G of storage, half of which is mail. The video card is a 256k trident card.

This is atypical of course. My desktop machines run 256MB or more, and 1000Mhz or better Processors.

My work machine is a 2.1GHz Core2 duo machine with 1G of ram. I'm only using about 10GB of hard drive space. The video card is an NVIDIA 7300 256MB. I'm using NVIDIA's driver to get better, faster 3D video.

Linux will run on lots of hardware. Just set your expectations in accordance. Generally, Linux will meet and beat your expectations with a little time.

Jeffery

--
Jeffery Williams
Software Test Engineer
IU Cyclotron Facility
jefjewil@indiana.edu
Work (812) 856-1165
Home (812) 219-5061


> -----Original Message-----
> From: blug-bounces@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-bounces@cs.indiana.edu]
> On Behalf Of Paul Proctor
> Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 8:33 PM
> To: Bloomington LINUX Users Group
> Subject: Re: [BLUG] New OS
>
> Hi,
> Got at least three machines not on the router. A newer Dell an old Dell
> 8100
> and an old Compaq. My guess is you have to be more concerned about
> hardware
> than in Windows. I have heard rumors about things like monitor fires.
> Is
> this true?? I live in Ellettsville so download speed with Comcast is
> OK.
> Burning ISO's are not a problem either. What about processor speed and
> memory mimium requirements? Is an AMD processor OK? What about HD
> preperation? Can I start with a FAT32 partition or NTFS? How about no
> partition at all?
> Thanks for the links I will get Ubuntu ISO ASAP, check my homeowners
> insurance and load it on one soon. Any preference of my available
> machines?
> Thanx,
> Paul
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Simón Ruiz" <simon.a.ruiz@gmail.com>
> To: "Bloomington LINUX Users Group" <blug@cs.indiana.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 1:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [BLUG] New OS
>
>
> > Paul,
> >
> > Well, so an install would be your first step.
> >
> > If your hobby is PC building I'm guessing that, like me, you've got
> > more than one computer laying around, huh? Pick one to play with and
> > install some flavor of Linux on it.
> >
> > Now, I'm a little biased since I'm pretty active in Ubuntu's Indiana
> > Local Community (LoCo), but I think Ubuntu is a great starting place.
> >
> > Are you comfortable downloading and burning CD-ROM .iso images? If
> so,
> > head on over to <http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download>. If you're
> > in Bloomington, you'll most likely get the fastest possible download
> > from the "ftp.ussg.iu.edu" option.
> >
> > I think, like me, that you'll find that installing Ubuntu is a LOT
> > easier and faster than installing XP. Not to mention, it comes
> > pre-loaded with a lot of the software you'd end up having to install
> > yourself after a Windows install.
> >
> > Plus, you don't need to worry about setting up virus scanners,
> malware
> > removers, or a firewall except in special circumstances (e.g., we
> have
> > a virus checker running on our file server and mail server at work
> not
> > so the servers are protected from virii, but so our users running
> > Windows are).
> >
> > A note on hardware, especially since you build your own:
> > Unfortunately, most hardware manufacturers only worry about making
> > sure their hardware runs on Windows and the open source community is
> > left to their own devices as far as getting it to run on any other
> OS.
> >
> > This means that some of the latest hardware may take a bit of extra
> > work to get running, or is functionally limited, under Linux. So most
> > of us who build systems with the intent of installing Linux on them
> > need to do the research to know what is and isn't supported yet.
> > (Nothing is more irritating that buying a piece of hardware, plugging
> > it in, and finding out that you aren't getting full functionality out
> > of it right now.)
> >
> > On the other hand, for 95% of the hardware out there you won't need
> to
> > go find drivers for it, since it'll be supported right out of the
> box.
> > On Ubuntu, there's a "restricted drivers manager" (under System ->
> > Administration -> Hardware Drivers) that will go out and
> automatically
> > download and set up the extra drivers that are unable to be included
> > automatically due to intellectual property concerns, covering another
> > 4% of the possibilities.
> >
> > It's in that 1% of cases (or more, if you like buying on the cutting
> > edge) that this can be a real pain.
> >
> > (NOTE, the percentages here are vague, biased, hand-wavy estimates
> > based on personal experience, not real statistics.)
> >
> > So jump in the pool, swim around a bit, and when in doubt, ask
> questions.
> >
> > Take care!
> >
> > Simón
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Paul Proctor
> <proctor710@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Hi Simon,
> >> I am comfortable with Windows but a good bit of my income and my
> hobby is
> >> from building PC's. I would like to use an OS that is more open.
> >> I understand something new would be a chalange, no problem. I just
> need
> >> some
> >> material to experiment with.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Paul
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > BLUG mailing list
> > BLUG@linuxfan.com
> > http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1683 - Release Date:
> 9/21/2008
> 10:10 AM
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

Steven,

Erm. I don't rightly remember.

It's certainly probable that I discussed my frustrations on this list
during the fiasco in more detail than I am giving now.

I don't even remember what finally got me to test the RAM—in my hazy
memory it was just desperately testing every hardware component on the
stupid thing.

I know I replaced the motherboard and the processor and the CD-ROM
drive and the power supply before I ever thought to test the
memory...d'oh!

If I said I checked the logs and found something about the RAM...then
I'd say I'm inclined to trust myself. ;-)

Simón

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:41:11PM -0400, Simón Ruiz wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
>> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
>
> I thought you said when you checked the logs, you actually saw a single
> line stating something about the RAM.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
> Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

I have two stories for you guys.

One is about a friend of a friend who had a bad chunk of memory on his
Linux machine. Memory was much more expensive at the time, so he
couldn't replace it. Instead, he hacked the kernel to avoid the bad
section of RAM. other than losing a little RAM, it worked fine.

The other is about a friend who had some obscure and hard to duplicate
computer problems. Things seemed to work better in windows, but not much
better. Once while in Linux, he noticed that some characters were
swapped. If I recall the conversation right, 'D' showed up as '@' and
'd' printed as '`'. Bit 2 (mask 0x4) was bad in one specific byte of
memory!

Simón Ruiz wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
>> steered around them"? --SS
>>
>
> I simply mean that with that particular stick of damaged memory I ran
> Ubuntu perfectly fine without rebooting for several weeks, and with
> the same damaged stick Windows XP couldn't even finish installing (or
> boot when I got it installed using other memory).
>
> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
>
> Simón
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> I am afraid that this is not a correct assumption. Different OSes has
> different way of allocating/using memory. Probably it's just lucky that
> Ubuntu had not touched the bad memory block. --SS

I most certainly concede "perhaps", as I definitely don't know what
I'm talking about with any certainty.

I find "probably" too strong a word, though.

You see, I'm a memory hog and find myself regularly forcing Ubuntu to
swap if I'm in a system with less than 2GB of memory.

I played memory-intense 3-D games (Nexuiz, anyone?) and routinely ran
the GIMP on many large photos at once, while keeping Firefox open with
my customary zillion tabs.

If Ubuntu didn't touch the bad memory blocks, I find design more
probable than luck.

Though I do concede that I don't really know what I'm talking about.

Simón

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

While we are at this, you might be interested in taking a look at this --

http://rick.vanrein.org/linux/badram/

I have never tried this though -- fortunately my RAM chips have not given up on me after I discovered this.

 -- Abhishek

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
I am afraid that this is not a correct assumption.  Different OSes has
different way of allocating/using memory.  Probably it's just lucky that
Ubuntu had not touched the bad memory block.  --SS

> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
>> steered around them"?  --SS
>>
>
> I simply mean that with that particular stick of damaged memory I ran
> Ubuntu perfectly fine without rebooting for several weeks, and with
> the same damaged stick Windows XP couldn't even finish installing (or
> boot when I got it installed using other memory).
>
> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
>
> Simón
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>


_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

I am afraid that this is not a correct assumption. Different OSes has
different way of allocating/using memory. Probably it's just lucky that
Ubuntu had not touched the bad memory block. --SS

> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>
>> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
>> steered around them"? --SS
>>
>
> I simply mean that with that particular stick of damaged memory I ran
> Ubuntu perfectly fine without rebooting for several weeks, and with
> the same damaged stick Windows XP couldn't even finish installing (or
> boot when I got it installed using other memory).
>
> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.
>
> Simón
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>


_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:41:11PM -0400, Simón Ruiz wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
> kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.

I thought you said when you checked the logs, you actually saw a single
line stating something about the RAM.

Cheers,

--
Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E

Re: [BLUG] New OS

I've heard this particular story before. (Otherwise I would leave it
for Simón to explain.)

Simón means basically what he said. He didn't do anything to get Linux
to work. He thought his RAM was fine. It turns out it wasn't. When he
checked the kernel logs, he found one tiny message about the bad RAM
being bypassed. Linux checked for this and took action automatically.

Linux is the operating system where things just work better.

Cheers,
Steven Black

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 03:34:39PM -0400, Shei, Shing-Shong wrote:
> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
> steered around them"? --SS
>
> > Long story short, I finally ran a memory test (since Ubuntu ran
> > perfectly fine, I never thought the memory might be bad...) and found
> > out that one of the memory sticks was damaged which rendered XP
> > unusable, but it turns out the Linux kernel just noticed the potholes
> > and steered around them.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Shei, Shing-Shong <shei@cs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
> steered around them"? --SS

I simply mean that with that particular stick of damaged memory I ran
Ubuntu perfectly fine without rebooting for several weeks, and with
the same damaged stick Windows XP couldn't even finish installing (or
boot when I got it installed using other memory).

Since it relates to how memory is used, I only assumed that it was the
kernels that handled the errors with aplomb or not.

Simón

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

I am curious -- how did you that " kernel just noticed the potholes and
steered around them"? --SS

> Long story short, I finally ran a memory test (since Ubuntu ran
> perfectly fine, I never thought the memory might be bad...) and found
> out that one of the memory sticks was damaged which rendered XP
> unusable, but it turns out the Linux kernel just noticed the potholes
> and steered around them.
>
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> wrote:
> You may be surprised. Processors which were buggy and unreliable in
> Windows may actually function better in Linux. Linux checks for and
> works around a large number of processor bugs.

Not just processors.

I put together a computer out of some used parts about a year and a
half ago and installed Ubuntu on it. It ran sweet.

After a couple of weeks, I decided to go ahead and splurge on a
Windows-only game (Civilization IV; what can I say? I'm a Sid Meier
addict...) so I sat down to install Windows XP on the same machine.
The weirdest thing kept happening, though; it kept dying at random
points during the install.

Long story short, I finally ran a memory test (since Ubuntu ran
perfectly fine, I never thought the memory might be bad...) and found
out that one of the memory sticks was damaged which rendered XP
unusable, but it turns out the Linux kernel just noticed the potholes
and steered around them.

Simón

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] Ohio LinuxFest

On 9/20/08 7:10 PM, "Simón Ruiz" <simon.a.ruiz@gmail.com> wrote:
> P.S. If you're unsure about whether you wanna go to OLF, Go! You won't
> regret it. I'm taking my wife along, she had a blast last year even
> though she wasn't particularly interested in many of the talks.

...and the last two years, their Oktoberfest has coincided with the date of
the OLF (not sure if that's the case this year). We got bored last year,
walked the four or so blocks, and enjoyed the Oktoberfest celebration as
well.

--
Jeremy L. Gaddis
Network Administrator
Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana
812.330.6156 (w) 812.391.3971 (m)

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

Mark Krenz wrote:
> Mark Warner said the following:
>>
>> Most recently, I set up a box for a "charity case" (friend of wife) with
>> PCLinuxOS. Wife went out and bought a new printer (HP, at my insistence)
>> to go with it. Came back with an All in One print/copy/scan gizmo.
>> Printing set up automagically, but the copy/scan function would *not*
>> work for nuthin'.
>
> I used to have problems like that, but since about Ubuntu 7.04 I
> haven't. Do you remember which printer it was? I have a HP Officejet
> 5610 that works great under Linux. Even our big color laserjet 3550n in
> our office works now.
>
> Also, how did you test the scanning?

This was a couple months ago, so I don't recall the details. I spent an
entire evening on it, going through everything I could scare up from HP,
Sane, PCLOS, and Google. Wife (not into 'nix) was harrumping over my
shoulder the whole time. (The install I had in place was sweet --
PCLinuxOS 2008 MiniMe with everything a typical home user would need or
want, and it ran like a scared rabbit on a 1.2GHz/384MB.) I blew it up,
loaded XP, and washed my hands of it. Wife takes the support calls now.

--
Mark Warner
SimplyMEPIS Linux v6.5
Registered Linux User #415318

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 08:33:10PM -0400, Paul Proctor wrote:
> I have heard rumors about things like monitor
> fires. Is this true??

Monitor fires are extremely uncommon unless you're pulling out all the
stops on ancient hardware.

Serial ports can have a number of settings, and it used to be the norm
to scan the potential serial ports at start-up. This combined with Mono
cards (I *think*) which didn't check the data before sending it to the
monitor did, in fact, cause monitor fires.

You must also remember, though, that when these video displays were
common there was at least one virus floating around that would also
trigger monitor fires.

Why is this of any matter anymore? Well, if I remembered correctly and
it was the mono cards that were susceptable, then... An interesting note
about Mono video cards is that they use a different memory region to
communicate with the cards than EGA/VGA cards. This means it is possible
to have both a mono card -- connected to a mono monitor, as well as a
more modern EGA/VGA interface. I believe Linux supports (or did support)
such a thing, though I'm not sure how it was configured as I was only
exposed to such configurations prior to my move to Linux.

If you're bored and are reading all of the help messages for the serial
subsystem in the kernel, IIRC, you should still find a warning about
this. (Recompiling your kernel can be fun when you're learning things,
and reading the help messages can give you an idea of why things behave
the way they do.)

> I live in Ellettsville so download speed with
> Comcast is OK. Burning ISO's are not a problem either. What about
> processor speed and memory mimium requirements?

Minimum requirements vary depending on the particular distribution.

Any of the fancy KDE/GNOME based systems will have similar min.
requirements to that of Windows XP. 512MB of RAM and 8G should be fine
for most. More is better. Check for specific recommendations before
you download the ISO.

> Is an AMD processor OK?

You may be surprised. Processors which were buggy and unreliable in
Windows may actually function better in Linux. Linux checks for and
works around a large number of processor bugs.

Almost any x86 processor will be fine, provided that it has speeds
roughly on par with their recommendation. (They may recommend Pentium 4,
but as long as it is about as fast as a Pentium 4 it should be fine.)

> What about HD preperation?

Most installers make this easy. They will ask you if you're keeping
Windows, or if Linux will be the only OS. If you're keeping Windows they
should have the capacity to resize your free space. This is a lot easier
than it used to be.say

I recommend you just try it out with wiping the drives of some of your
spares, though. Ideally, you'd want to just make sure you have the original
restore media. (Make it, if you've not made it yet.)

If you're ready for the possibility of erasing the data, you'll be a lot
less surprised when it happens unexpectedly. Mistakes happen, especially
at this stage of things.

> Can I start with a FAT32 partition or NTFS?

If you're trying out Ubuntu/Kubuntu, then Yes. The 'Wubi' tool makes
this possible.

> How about no partition at all?

There are also a number of 'Live CDs' which let you try it out without
installing anything. Ubuntu/Kubuntu have one on their installer. A
number of other distributions have a "Live CD".

> Any preference of my available machines?

Pick one which isn't so substandard that it would make anything suck.

You could also pick one running Windows Vista (or potentially Windows
ME), just to see the increase in speed.

Cheers,
Steven Black

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simón Ruiz" <simon.a.ruiz@gmail.com>
> To: "Bloomington LINUX Users Group" <blug@cs.indiana.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2008 1:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [BLUG] New OS
>
>
>> Paul,
>>
>> Well, so an install would be your first step.
>>
>> If your hobby is PC building I'm guessing that, like me, you've got
>> more than one computer laying around, huh? Pick one to play with and
>> install some flavor of Linux on it.
>>
>> Now, I'm a little biased since I'm pretty active in Ubuntu's Indiana
>> Local Community (LoCo), but I think Ubuntu is a great starting place.
>>
>> Are you comfortable downloading and burning CD-ROM .iso images? If so,
>> head on over to <http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download>. If you're
>> in Bloomington, you'll most likely get the fastest possible download
>> from the "ftp.ussg.iu.edu" option.
>>
>> I think, like me, that you'll find that installing Ubuntu is a LOT
>> easier and faster than installing XP. Not to mention, it comes
>> pre-loaded with a lot of the software you'd end up having to install
>> yourself after a Windows install.
>>
>> Plus, you don't need to worry about setting up virus scanners, malware
>> removers, or a firewall except in special circumstances (e.g., we have
>> a virus checker running on our file server and mail server at work not
>> so the servers are protected from virii, but so our users running
>> Windows are).
>>
>> A note on hardware, especially since you build your own:
>> Unfortunately, most hardware manufacturers only worry about making
>> sure their hardware runs on Windows and the open source community is
>> left to their own devices as far as getting it to run on any other OS.
>>
>> This means that some of the latest hardware may take a bit of extra
>> work to get running, or is functionally limited, under Linux. So most
>> of us who build systems with the intent of installing Linux on them
>> need to do the research to know what is and isn't supported yet.
>> (Nothing is more irritating that buying a piece of hardware, plugging
>> it in, and finding out that you aren't getting full functionality out
>> of it right now.)
>>
>> On the other hand, for 95% of the hardware out there you won't need to
>> go find drivers for it, since it'll be supported right out of the box.
>> On Ubuntu, there's a "restricted drivers manager" (under System ->
>> Administration -> Hardware Drivers) that will go out and automatically
>> download and set up the extra drivers that are unable to be included
>> automatically due to intellectual property concerns, covering another
>> 4% of the possibilities.
>>
>> It's in that 1% of cases (or more, if you like buying on the cutting
>> edge) that this can be a real pain.
>>
>> (NOTE, the percentages here are vague, biased, hand-wavy estimates
>> based on personal experience, not real statistics.)
>>
>> So jump in the pool, swim around a bit, and when in doubt, ask questions.
>>
>> Take care!
>>
>> Simón
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Paul Proctor <proctor710@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Simon,
>>> I am comfortable with Windows but a good bit of my income and my hobby is
>>> from building PC's. I would like to use an OS that is more open.
>>> I understand something new would be a chalange, no problem. I just
>>> need some
>>> material to experiment with.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Paul
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> BLUG mailing list
>> BLUG@linuxfan.com
>> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.7.0/1683 - Release Date: 9/21/2008
> 10:10 AM
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

--
Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E

Re: [BLUG] Desperate for a new OS (was: Happy Software Freedom Day!)

Welcome Paul!

How much have you read about Linux?

Everything you need to know is freely available online. A good
source of these documents is The Linux Documentation Project at
http://www.tldp.org/ . Most Linux folks are in to both free source and
free documentation. You can find printed versions of the same documents.

When talking about Linux, there's a lot of talk about "Linux
Distributions". Wikipedia has a decent article on this, if you don't
know what it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_distribution

Personally, I've been recommending the Ubuntu (or Kubuntu)
distributions. It also has the advantage of having "Wubi" -- an Ubuntu
installer for Windows that can install Ubuntu / Kubuntu alongside
Windows to try it out. http://wubi-installer.org/

We all started somewhere, and a surprising number of us started with
simply the desire for something other than the Microsoft Monstrosity.
I picked up Linux in 1995, before Windows 95 was on the market, and it
appeared clear from the betas that it would be ugly as sin.

There are a number of different major desktop environments. The two
most popular desktop environments at this point are probably GNOME
(used by default in Ubuntu) and KDE (used by default in Kubuntu). Some
distributions allow both GNONE and KDE applications to be used alongside
each other, while others only have GNOME or KDE available. Just because
GNOME and KDE are popular, that doesn't mean there aren't others. There
are a *lot* of options available, some of them more light-weight than
others.

Distribution wars can, at times, reach an almost religious zeal. I
recommend you try more than one. More specifically, I recommend you
try at least one RPM-based distribution and at least one DEB-based
distribution. (For a good time, and an experience of the full range of
potential, you could try them in this order: Slackware, Fedora, Ubuntu,
Foresight.)

However, when getting your feet wet in Linux, I recommend you stick
with one distribution until you feel comfortable enough to branch out.
I recommend Ubuntu/Kubuntu both for the ease of install and general
use, and also because there are a lot of applications you can play with
without installing anything from source. (There are even a wide variety
of options for "standard" components that are really core to the basic
functionality.)

If you have older hardware (more than 10 years old) I, personally,
recommend Debian. (There are others, some of which may still support 386
4MB machines, but that hardware is getting pretty rare.) Debian requires
64MB RAM and 1G HD min. with no desktop. They recommend a Pentium 4
1GHz with 256MB RAM for a system with no desktop. (No desktop meaning
text-mode only.) The great thing about Debian is that if you pick your
packages carefully, you can actually get away with only 64M. They have
lighter weight alternatives of pretty much all the larger components.

If you have hardware that is too old to run a light-weight Linux, you
could always look in to FreeDOS. http://www.freedos.org/ Almost as free
as Linux (some things may not have source), but a lot more DOS-like.
(When they hit 1.0, they had all the features of MS DOS 7. Most DOS
things should work, unless they used particularly obscure undocumented
features.)

Cheers,
Steven Black

--
Steven Black <blacks@indiana.edu> / KeyID: 8596FA8E
Fingerprint: 108C 089C EFA4 832C BF07 78C2 DE71 5433 8596 FA8E

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 08:10:30AM -0400, Paul Proctor wrote:
> Hi,
> You guys don't know me but I am sorta desperate. I know nothing about
> LINUX. I have been using and building PC's since the days of DOS.
> I need a new OS and lots of advice on LINUX. My first step should
> probably be to attend a meeting I guess. Any help would be much
> apreciated!
>
> Thanx,
> Paul Proctor

Re: [BLUG] New OS

On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 07:28:16PM GMT, Mark Warner [markwarner1954@att.net] said the following:
> That's been my experience in *most* cases, but....
>
> Most recently, I set up a box for a "charity case" (friend of wife) with
> PCLinuxOS. Wife went out and bought a new printer (HP, at my insistence)
> to go with it. Came back with an All in One print/copy/scan gizmo.
> Printing set up automagically, but the copy/scan function would *not*
> work for nuthin'.
>

I used to have problems like that, but since about Ubuntu 7.04 I
haven't. Do you remember which printer it was? I have a HP Officejet
5610 that works great under Linux. Even our big color laserjet 3550n in
our office works now.

Also, how did you test the scanning?


--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug