TOT: Best/easiest Linux install

"Mr K" <duffstuff.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7_SdnV2PMYY3l4XbnZ2dnUVZ8sCsnZ2d@pipex.net...
> On Saturday 07 Apr 2007 21:35, Schrodinger wrote:
>
>
>> Reboot into Linux and after a bit of faffing got it to format the
>> partition
>> I had prepared. It then complained about not having a "swap partition".
>> Guessing this was akin to Photoshop complaining about having its "swap
>> file"
>> on the same partition and not being able to figure a way around this, I
>> carried on.
>
> Linux likes (and requires?) a small partition purely for its swapfile. Its
> size
> should be double your PC memory, up to 1GB.
>

Ah. Right. I'm guessing I can sort this once I get booted into the Linux
GUI.


>> Then, I tried to configure KDE. To cut a long story short, it would not
>> recognise my card (a Radeon x1950pro). I tried ATI, Radeon, Generic,
>> XDA,
>> VGA, the funny named thing. No dice.
>
> Uh oh... ati and Linux don't mix well.

Hmmm. This is the first ATI card I've owned. The overall performance is
good, but there are odd glitches - including this - that mean I won't own
one again.


>> Of course, it rebooted straight into XP. As I'm using a SATA disc,
>> though,
>> I guessed this was because my BIOS was looking at the wrong disc for the
>> boot loader.
>
> Hmm... it might be that the bootloader default is set to windows. With my
> system being on old-fashioned IDE, I can't say how a new SATA dualboot
> install
> should act.
>
>> Selecting the correct disc on restart gave me a login prompt. I managed
>> to
>> "log in" using my name as given in the install. This gave me a command
>> prompt.
>>
>> Now, I know DOS, BASIC and AMIGADOS commands - but none worked. It also
>> did
>> not understand swearing, so I had to reboot and post this message.
>
> If you have X installed, and a GUI desktop, "startx" should be all that's
> required.
>

Aha!

I'll try this now.

>> You could delete most of the above post and replace with the word
>> "help!".
>
> Linux isn't easy, but nor is windows.
>

I guessed it wouldn't be easy - hence why I posted here. I can promise you
I haven't ever posted when installing windows!

I've been into computers since the ZX81 and, until recently, would have
figured stuff out for myself. This would have taken far longer and I am
guessing you guys are better at this than I will ever be. It is very
appreciated to see quick replies to posts here from people I trust.



> --
> Photos - http://boltondave.fotopic.net/
>
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

"Schrodinger" <no DeleteThis @way.com> wrote in message
news:C_TRh.263987$8a4.37230@fe03.news.easynews.com...
>
> "Mr K" <duffstuff DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:7_SdnV2PMYY3l4XbnZ2dnUVZ8sCsnZ2d@pipex.net...
>> On Saturday 07 Apr 2007 21:35, Schrodinger wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Reboot into Linux and after a bit of faffing got it to format the
>>> partition
>>> I had prepared. It then complained about not having a "swap partition".
>>> Guessing this was akin to Photoshop complaining about having its "swap
>>> file"
>>> on the same partition and not being able to figure a way around this, I
>>> carried on.
>>
>> Linux likes (and requires?) a small partition purely for its swapfile.
>> Its size
>> should be double your PC memory, up to 1GB.
>>
>
> Ah. Right. I'm guessing I can sort this once I get booted into the Linux
> GUI.
>
>
>>> Then, I tried to configure KDE. To cut a long story short, it would not
>>> recognise my card (a Radeon x1950pro). I tried ATI, Radeon, Generic,
>>> XDA,
>>> VGA, the funny named thing. No dice.
>>
>> Uh oh... ati and Linux don't mix well.
>
> Hmmm. This is the first ATI card I've owned. The overall performance is
> good, but there are odd glitches - including this - that mean I won't own
> one again.
>
>
>>> Of course, it rebooted straight into XP. As I'm using a SATA disc,
>>> though,
>>> I guessed this was because my BIOS was looking at the wrong disc for the
>>> boot loader.
>>
>> Hmm... it might be that the bootloader default is set to windows. With my
>> system being on old-fashioned IDE, I can't say how a new SATA dualboot
>> install
>> should act.
>>
>>> Selecting the correct disc on restart gave me a login prompt. I managed
>>> to
>>> "log in" using my name as given in the install. This gave me a command
>>> prompt.
>>>
>>> Now, I know DOS, BASIC and AMIGADOS commands - but none worked. It also
>>> did
>>> not understand swearing, so I had to reboot and post this message.
>>
>> If you have X installed, and a GUI desktop, "startx" should be all that's
>> required.
>>
>
> Aha!
>
> I'll try this now.
>
>>> You could delete most of the above post and replace with the word
>>> "help!".
>>
>> Linux isn't easy, but nor is windows.
>>
>
> I guessed it wouldn't be easy - hence why I posted here. I can promise
> you I haven't ever posted when installing windows!
>
> I've been into computers since the ZX81 and, until recently, would have
> figured stuff out for myself. This would have taken far longer and I am
> guessing you guys are better at this than I will ever be. It is very
> appreciated to see quick replies to posts here from people I trust.
>
>
>
>> --
>> Photos - http://boltondave.fotopic.net/
>>
>


Well, the "startx" command worked. Until the error message about no
something or other being found.

I'm guessing this install doesn't like ATI cards. I'll try again with the
Kubuntu install I have already. Now I've been through it once, I'm a lot
more confident anyway.
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

Frank van Schie <nospam DeleteThis @please.don't> wrote in
news:Tt6dnexXVOXFWIrbnZ2dnUVZ8sqjnZ2d@casema.nl:

> ScratchMonkey wrote:
>> So how would one choose between them, with no prior knowledge of any
>> of them?
>
> Tossing a coin? Guessing? No easy answers, I'm afraid

I was kinda looking more for a feature comparison.

> Finding and starting the right apps and having them available is going
> to take a while. It's a pretty major change to your workflow. I think
> trying to bend the new system to your old ways is not going to end
> well. That said, KDE represents the more Windows-y look'n'feel. There
> is no PuTTY, there is just the shell.

That's no problem, for me PuTTY is just the way to get to the shell. I
mentioned it only as a way of saying that my "environment" is really
mostly using shell commands. That and my favorite EMACS-like editor,
Epsilon. (Although I need to learn Gnu EMACS' variation in dialect so I'm
not so dependent on a relatively expensive editor. I love Epsilon but
paying for another round of upgrade really bites into the wallet.) Those
who use any form of EMACS consider it as much an environment as any GUI.

> I'm now a Mac user when I'm on my work notebook. I've found the Mac
> method of organizing apps to be very nice, once I took the time to get
> used to it. Installed Quicksilver (must-have application) and it's
> great. I've never had that good an experience with Linux.

Windows' Quick Launch is adequate for me. I have a small handful of apps
I use regularly, and the rest are easy enough to either find on a menu or
navigate to their installation directory. So the idea of having a really
fancy GUI is a little alien, as I don't understand what's present to
choose one over the other.

I did just recently learn why the Mac's central menu is such a Good
Thing. It's an interesting use of Fitt's Law to make the mouse target
area "infinitely tall".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts'_law

While reading up on that, I followed a link to a page about "crossing-
based interfaces":

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

Now check out this nifty demo:

http://www.dontclick.it/

> I'm a Java programmer. I use Eclipse, which is written in Java and
> runs pretty much anywhere.
>
> As for development environments, I've heard about KDevelop
> (KDE-based). Unable to say good or bad about it, but there you go.

I'd heard of both but haven't had a chance to play with either. Sounds
like KDevelop might be what I want for my C++ work. And I may be using
Eclipse at some point for some Java stuff.
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

"Schrodinger" <no.DeleteThis@way.com> wrote in
news:VfTRh.117747$tk6.93286@fe10.news.easynews.com:

> Now, I know DOS, BASIC and AMIGADOS commands - but none worked. It
> also did not understand swearing, so I had to reboot and post this
> message.

From within a command line shell, you can learn commands using the "man"
(manual) command. Typing "man -k" and a keyword will give you a list of
manual pages that mention that keyword. Then type "man" and a command name
to get the help for that command. For instance, "man ls" gives help on the
ls command that lists directories. "man man" gives you help on the man
command itself.

The manual is split up into sections. The default section is 1, and has all
the user commands. To read pages in other sections, you use something like
"man 8 cron". Sections 2 and 3 are programming API's. 5 is file formats
(such as the crontab file for holding things to do at scheduled times). 8
is system programs (like cron, which displays/edits the crontab files). (I
didn't find a reference to explain which section is which, so I'm just
reporting some I use frequently from memory.)

The man system dates back to early Unix, long before GUI's. There are some
GUI and web-based access systems so you can browse man pages without a
terminal window. You can find some online by googling for "man page
viewer". Here's an example:

http://www2.yo-linux.com/cgi-bin/man.cgi
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

ScratchMonkey wrote:
> Frank van Schie <nospam.TakeThisOut@please.don't> wrote in
> news:Tt6dnexXVOXFWIrbnZ2dnUVZ8sqjnZ2d@casema.nl:
>
>> ScratchMonkey wrote:
>>> So how would one choose between them, with no prior knowledge of any
>>> of them?
>> Tossing a coin? Guessing? No easy answers, I'm afraid
>
> I was kinda looking more for a feature comparison.

Sorry

>> Finding and starting the right apps and having them available is going
>> to take a while. It's a pretty major change to your workflow. I think
>> trying to bend the new system to your old ways is not going to end
>> well. That said, KDE represents the more Windows-y look'n'feel. There
>> is no PuTTY, there is just the shell.
>
> That's no problem, for me PuTTY is just the way to get to the shell. I
> mentioned it only as a way of saying that my "environment" is really
> mostly using shell commands. That and my favorite EMACS-like editor,
> Epsilon. (Although I need to learn Gnu EMACS' variation in dialect so I'm
> not so dependent on a relatively expensive editor. I love Epsilon but
> paying for another round of upgrade really bites into the wallet.) Those
> who use any form of EMACS consider it as much an environment as any GUI.

Funny, vi(m) doesn't cost any money.

And it's better than EMACS.

<gd&r>

>> I'm now a Mac user when I'm on my work notebook. I've found the Mac
>> method of organizing apps to be very nice, once I took the time to get
>> used to it. Installed Quicksilver (must-have application) and it's
>> great. I've never had that good an experience with Linux.
>
> Windows' Quick Launch is adequate for me. I have a small handful of apps
> I use regularly, and the rest are easy enough to either find on a menu or
> navigate to their installation directory. So the idea of having a really
> fancy GUI is a little alien, as I don't understand what's present to
> choose one over the other.

That's the most annoying thing about using Linux, I've found. Noone's
gone and pulled everything out of obscurity into the light.

I have a nearly filled Quick Launch bar in Windows, myself. It's really
the best way ot have your common and semi-common apps handy in the system.

> I did just recently learn why the Mac's central menu is such a Good
> Thing. It's an interesting use of Fitt's Law to make the mouse target
> area "infinitely tall".
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts'_law


Well, I like it because it only represents one of the following:
- Quick start shortcut, or
- Running program. Not running window, but running program.

You can close all windows in an application and it will still be running
(and bloody fast to open a new Window, at that). You can, of course,
quit easily, but I find I have about four or five pieces of software I
have running all the time, with or without screens (Firefox, Vienna
(RSS), Mail, Eclipse, at the least).

It is, essentially, a cross between the system tray and the quick launch
toolbar, but then without the incredibly useless icons you never want to
check anyway.

> While reading up on that, I followed a link to a page about "crossing-
> based interfaces":
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_Based_Interfaces
>
> Now check out this nifty demo:
>
> http://www.dontclick.it/

Don't like it. The idea is nice, but in practice it's inaccurate. I see
the row of testtubes, I want the third from the left, and the left one
opens. Wouldn't have happened with a click

>> I'm a Java programmer. I use Eclipse, which is written in Java and
>> runs pretty much anywhere.
>>
>> As for development environments, I've heard about KDevelop
>> (KDE-based). Unable to say good or bad about it, but there you go.
>
> I'd heard of both but haven't had a chance to play with either. Sounds
> like KDevelop might be what I want for my C++ work. And I may be using
> Eclipse at some point for some Java stuff.

I recommend it. I love working with Eclipse, in comparison to some
environment (notably, NetBeans). It's fast and responsive, extensive and
feature-rich, and generally a pleasure to work with.

If you have to use it with an SVN repository, you have Subclipse. I hate
it. It's slow and buggy, it's based on SVN 1.3 at the latest (meaning
it's incompatible with local working copies that have been glanced at by
an SVN 1.4 client), and generally I want to drag the people who thought
it fit for release behind my car and drag them through Belgium.

(well, not that bad, but it has Issues.)
--
Frank
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

I tried a bunch of Linux live CDs... the easiest and best supported is
probably Ubuntu. It has a great forums and tutorials in case you run into
issues.

--
Fabrice Roux aka [RS]Faramir_agst
PaintShop Pro and Tribes scripts
http://www.fabriceroux.com
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

Mr K wrote:
> On Sunday 08 Apr 2007 15:18, Schrodinger wrote:
>
>> By selecting a combination of ATI and radeon in the drivers, I got it to
>> recognise the card and tested ok in 1280x1024. On booting, however, it was
>> stuck in an endless loop.
>
> That's one reason why I don't set KDE (or whatever GUI) to automatically start
> upon booting up. Plus, if X server decides to go 100% on the CPU (for some
> reason), I can drop back to the command prompt, then simply go back into KDE
> again.

Well, technically you can always get to a command prompt (just do
CTRL-ALT-2 (actually 2-5, on most systems) to switch to a terminal. X
should not pop up again.

Or hit CTRL-ALT-Backspace to kill the graphics bit, hopefully not
triggering a restart.

But yeah, it's generally a good idea not to start into graphical mode.
On Linux.

>> I'm figuring that, if this is the experience of a basic install I'm not
>> ready for Linux yet. I've done more than my share over the years of getting
>> computers up and running, with several different OSs - some not PC based. I
>> figure I'm better spending my time fixing the shed roof!
>
> Some people don't like Linux, some people don't like windows. That's just the
> way that is.

# ... Some things will never change #

--
Frank
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

"[RS]Faramir_agst" <spam.me.DeleteThis@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:MPG.2082e6885e077e4e9896fa@news.free.fr...
>I tried a bunch of Linux live CDs... the easiest and best supported is
> probably Ubuntu. It has a great forums and tutorials in case you run into
> issues.
>
> --
> Fabrice Roux aka [RS]Faramir_agst
> PaintShop Pro and Tribes scripts
> http://www.fabriceroux.com
>

Hmmm.

I'll try that then. I hate admitting defeat!
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

Frank van Schie <nospam RemoveThis @please.don't> wrote in
news:yqidnfjWFMh9TIXbnZ2dnUVZ8sWhnZ2d@casema.nl:

> Agreed. But Windows *runs*! With a user interface that looks as if it
> was designed in the last decade, at least! It's damn near impossible for
> a newbie to not get Windows to start up after installation.

The hardware vendors chase the biggest OS, and fail to document their
hardware enough so that 3rd parties can write drivers for them. (This
because of licensing and IP issues, of course.)

To me, the pretty interface is *all* that Windows is. If you want to do
real heavy-lifting, do it on another OS and use Windows as a client. Most
multi-player games work this way. When we say that we play Tribes "on
Windows" we're really saying that we're playing Tribes on some OS (Linux or
Windows server) and we're viewing a rendering of the Tribes world with a
Windows client. All the decision-making is happening on a server that needs
no local GUI to operate.

So it's really a mis-statement to say that "no one plays games on Linux".
It's just that few use a Linux client to interact with a game running on
Linux (the server).
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

Schrodinger wrote:
> I'd ask in a Linux group, but they're full of geeks!


Hmmm. <twirls the propeller blades on her beanie>

I rather enjoy my geekette status.

--
{{{{{HUGZ!}}}}}
>^,,^< Miracle
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

Schrodinger wrote:
> I've been into computers since the ZX81 and, until recently, would
> have figured stuff out for myself. This would have taken far longer
> and I am guessing you guys are better at this than I will ever be. It is very appreciated to see
> quick replies to posts here from people
> I trust.


Best bunch of folks I've ever known when I've needed help!

I stay because of the humor, though. LMAO

Seriously, I own the computer of my dreams thanks to
Quixote and this group. Built from the empty case and bare
mobo up. I'm still amazed I did that with no physical help.

--
>^,,^< Miracle
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install 

ScratchMonkey wrote:
> Now check out this nifty demo:
>
> http://www.dontclick.it/


I just had the best time there!! I can't wait to share
this with GNA (GoodNeighborAllen). Added it to my
list of favorite sites, too, as I want to try those damn
challenges again... LOL
 >> Stay informed about: TOT: Best/easiest Linux install