xbob

First, it happens to every sysadmin at least once, bummer. My only known cure, Ghirardelli chocolate covered espresso beans chased with Pepsi, been my friend during more than a few server resuces

Not nearly as nice or elablorate as some I've seen in this thread, I'll have to keep tweaking .

Edited, forgot LiquidWeather, mmmmeyecandy!!!

Don't quit so easily, Linux works with any Internet connection, some just take a little more effort.

What chipset do you have? If it's not in the README appendix then you need to add the line

NVAgp "2"

to the device section of your /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 file and then do a start x.

And of course change "nv" back to "nvidia"

Also, it should be impossible to install the driver with X active, it warns against it repeatedly, but if you somehow managed to do so, follow spiedra's instructions and re-install the driver (ignore any warning about "File Already Exist" since the first attemtped install may have dropped some symlinks.

Follow this, and it should work perfectly.

But one of the great strengths of Linux is, I guess: it can be what you want it to be B) .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Quoted for truth, and I agree, many good points Gowator.

You want fat, bug eyed penguins, you got it!!! I find those wallpapers somewhat amusing!

It's not the heat for sure, my Athlon XP 2000+ idles at 42 and loads at 48 in my Shuttle cube and never even hiccups, shouldn't be an issue until it is well above 60 in a regular tower case.

Go into BIOS and load defaults, not optmized defaults or performance defaults (which cranks everything to ideal perfromance levels), but some boards/BIOS label them as standard/factory/safe/base defaults. This will set memory timings and buses to their most conservative, then you can rule out the board as the culprit. What kind of memory did you install, and did you let it auto-detect (SPD) or did you hand-tweak the memory timing? If so, make sure they are set to auto-detect until we can rule out hardware.

As for drives...

-How many

-What size

-Master/Slave Cable Select

and what was your partitioning scheme?

Hang in there, we'll help you get through this, and maybe you'll get lucky and it was just a bad burn that new CDs will fix.

Have fun and ask anytime, that's what the board is for.

Not the most elegant solution, but why not boot from the Mdk CD and do an in place upgrade, then run updates, should preserve your settings and replace any damaged files. I haven't tried it, but it seems like an easy way out of a bad situation? Any one else try this?

Thanks!

 

How do I know my PC's IP please?

 

More info: the modem is connected on eth1.

eth0 is integrated with the motherboard and doesn't work!

 

Pascal

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm at work and not in front of my Linux box right now, but go to the KDE menu and go to "Configure Your Computer" and go to the network section, if you aren't familiar with this stuff you may want to take a look at the FAQs on this board, the networking section is very thurough.

 

Hello!

 

I use Mandrake 10.0 download edition for club members.

 

I have bought a Zyxel Prestige 623-ME ADSL modem because I could not get my Speedtouch usb to work with pppoe (I'm in Switzerland and I need pppoe!). It's now connected to a ethernet card which is well identified by Mandrake.

 

The modem should be configured via an html page accessible via an IP adress given in the manual. From what I heard, adsl through ethernet should work straightforward, but when I type the IP adress, Mozilla says it can't connect.

 

I have tried to boot on older kernel, doesn't work either. When I boot from Knoppix CD, the thing works, as easily as it should.

 

Could you help me please, I'm a linux newbie and don't even know in which config files to look and how to get informations from my system.

 

You surely know it, Mandrake without internet connection is quite useless!

 

Cheers!

 

Pascal

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Make sure your PC has an IP in the same class/subnet. i.e. if your new modem has a defualt IP of 192.168.0.1/24 then your PC should have an address like 192.168.0.9/24 (24 refrerring to a class C subnet as in 255.255.255.0).

I just found a Pentium 120 with 16 MB of RAM laying around. Being a packrat that I am, I want to turn that Pentium 120 into something useful. Now, I am thinking of using this as a dedicated fax receiver / e-mail server (for paperless office). Do you think the computer is powerful enough for this purpose? If it is not, what needs to be added (RAM wise, hard drive wise).

 

Thanks in advance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Depends on your volum and how many users, but for a smalll enough group it might work. I ran a mail server for 300 people with a K6-400 and 64megs SDRam with Red Hat 7 (POP3/SMTP) and it never did max the server out.

Oops. I meant 0.9.2. I should never try to ask a question in my sleep.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did you look in about:config and see what middle button was set to perform, might be there?

did that anyway just confused why it wasn't installed with the basic package... i didn't seem to install gkrellm either... is that easy enough to install off the cd? kind of like having the system info on the desktop

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

urpmi mozilla gets you a newer version, same thing with gkrellm (which yes, is like sysinfo/top on the desktop with a nice, skinnable GUI). Also check out gDesklets and SuperKaramba (KDE) for more cool system monitoring tools.

Anything specific for AMD64 ?

 

A.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can't really lose right now, you can spring for the newer Socket 939 stuff and have a long upgrade path or get really good deals on the Socket 754 stuff and even the 2800+ and still get far better performance than anything else in that price range (and an upgrade path through early next year, at least on the last AMD roadmap I saw). Obviously with Linux it sometimes takes a few weeks longer for the hackers to get really bleeding edge stuff working, so I would lean toward stuff that's been out a few weeks/months (but I tend to be somewhat conservative in this area, so your mileage may vary).

Personally, for the money right now I think the Athlon XP is the best bargain on the planet. I can't wait for 64bit computing to really hit mainstream, but for now I get plenty of juice out of 32bit. You can build a really peppy 32bit box for around $600 and be pretty loaded up. The box in my sig is less than a month old and runs Linux quite fast with very little tweaking (and damn amazing with some tweaking).

also keep in mind RDRAM must be put in in pairs (atleast, that's my understanding).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

At least installed in pairs, and unused sockets have to have a dummy installed/placeholder installed. Such poor design, too bad Intel wasted all those months pushing RDram only to admit DDR was better in the end.

...if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

darn it, i was just about to contact my friend yogi to be sure arctic had an "accident" while in the woods :D guess i'll have to let him come back alive....

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It was a total set up, he sends Arctic out to the woods to set a fire than he drops a dime to Yogi, then he calls Smokey, poor Arctic never had a chance....

Hey BooBoo, there's a penguin settin' fires in the woods, gimme' the phone... :D

The first link errors out for me in Totem and the latest HelixPlayer as well, maybe poorly encoded or corrupt? Don't have issue with other Real files so I can't be of much more help, sorry.

I thoroughly enjoyed this discussion.

 

Hope to read more such illuminating  threads here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's a really nice board and people can take different views without flaming or walking away enemies, that seems to be rare on the Internet these days. Given the chance I would have coffee and discuss Minimalsim with Arctic any day of the week, if he ever comes back from that walk in the woods.

My brother-in-law wants to upgrade his memory, but he currently had RDRAM(Rambus) memory.  Does that mean that his mobo only supports RDRAM memory, or could he buy SDRAM and install it ok?  Thanks.  :P

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nope, RDRam only...

Whether you or I agree on whether or not it's useful to us, the need is there in the real world. We don't have to agree on how useful these things may be -to us-, because what is being discussed is whether or not the need for them exists - and I know for a fact it does.

 

Like xbob points out, you're trying to change the industry to meet your very basic needs, when many others are in need of the power and "bloat" which you denounce as "useless" (IYO, that is).

well, you say that this necessary bloated stuff is necessary. if it is so necessary, then tell me, why hasn't it been necessary for the human race in more than 10000 years?

 

imho, this "need" for bloated stuff is nothing else than a bad reflection of our real needs. we tend to imagine that we need things that we really don't need, but as others might find it useful, we need them too, although we don't see the point in adopting certain things.

 

in other words: if everyone thinks that others think that they have to wear hats because they can't exist without hats, then we too would wear hats because we feel it is necessary, because we want to live... although we really don't need those hats, but we do not see that because we are trapped in some kind of maze. yes, this is somehow philosophical and psychological, but i think, we are becoming the victims of the wrongly produced imagined needs in our minds that are a wrong reflection of other peoples imagined needs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Arctic, seriously, you are starting to sound like a Luddite who has had one too many cups of coffee with a Minimalist. I respect your opinions, but attempting to psycho-analyze the emotional basis for software design/choices is the only maze you are trapped in.

Accept the idea that you do have a choice to run minimal GUI stuff on older hardware and accept that many of us enjoy the rich environment and don't mind shelling out for the benefits of new hardware every few years. If you can't see the advances and convenience (and added accessibility) that KDE brings over a green screen or even CDE then I am not sure what to say next. If we take your idea and run with it we should all be back scheduling time on the university VAX.

okay, here we are at the point of personal preferences where further arguing will lead to no solution. you might find them useful, i (in parts) do not them useful. :)

 

 

QUOTE(arctic @ Jul 25 2004, 05:06 PM)

why do we need java and subsequently java-plugins? or flash? (don't start a flame-war with me now ;) )

 

if you don't want 'em, don't get 'em,  :P

 

yeah, but then i can't see some websites :P

 

you do realize that a lot of the usage is just cached RAM, which is freed when needed?

yupp. but even so... open office eats lots of ram, same does mozilla.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But you have a choice, you can run Deb with FluxBox, or an even lighter window manager. You can use Vi or eMacs for text editing, and there are tons of lightweight web and mail clients. This goes back to trying to refocus the industry again, the web is now media rich and plug-ins serve a great purpose, bloat or not the Internet continues to evolve into different things, some better, some worse. There is nothing stopping you from hanging in IRC, getting your mail with Pine and so forthe. You are a solution in search of a problem, you have the freedom to run as light and unfettered as you chose or as bloated and eye-candy laden as your hardware can handle.

I doubt there are many people on this board who have both an AMD64 and a P4 xxxxx. If you want comparisons I think you would be better off at a site dedicated to hardware reviews.

 

Good luck.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You have a point - but most of the hardware sites are mostly windows specific. Linuxhardware.org is there but doesn't seems to have active forums like this site.

 

Besides, I really did not mean to ask for comparisons but rather opinions. I don't reckon you would need both a P4 and Athlon rig to have such opinion.

 

Thanks for the response though -

 

A.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well as both a network admin and custom PC builder I have run both side by side many times. Bang for the buck goes to AMD, the Athlon XP is a bargain and most chipsets are well supported under Linux. Nothing wrong with Intel, but the price/performance ratio goes to AMD by a long shot.

i also thought so, when i started with linux, but if you look at some programs, i doubt it. i think there must be a way to make the packages even smaller. if we look e.g. at the size of computers today, compared to the 1970's, they are very small, have even smaller data-storage equipment. why didn't get the coding of programs get smaller, too?    :unsure:

 

maybe it has to do with the different programming-languages that are basically somehow similar in their approach (correct me, if i am wrong here, as i am no professional programmer). ain't there a way for a more compressed language than c, c++, python, etc.? i think this could help both programmers and users alike (although it would surely be a whopping task to develop a new language again and implement it in linux  ).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't entirely disagree with this, but I am not a programmer and wouldn't know where to start. The C languages we designed with poratbility in mind, so I think user demand drives the bloat. Take away features=smaller code, but is that what most people want? Arctic, it strikes me that one paticular program has sent you off on this chain of thoughts, what program tipped you over the edge on this topic?

but it's this bloated technology that makes it all possible

okay, it is this "bloated technology" you say. i state that this "bloated" technology is not really necessary, if we would provide users with even smaller programs, more simplistic programs. but we would have to define "bloated" first in order to start a deep discussion.

:D

don't get me wrong, i personally like an eye-catching desktop/os, and when i really feel, i want something more simplistic, i switch on blackbox or the like. but i seriously ask myself, why programs that do not really do more than e.g. word for dos did, take up 100 times more hd-space today than they did fiftteen years ago, without adding anything really new? word for dos used some seven megabyte on a 100 mb hd (which was an extremely hd for that time). now look at todays word-processing programs. ~70+ megabyte hd space and 64 mb ram minimum. this is a bad joke. not everyone is willing to buy (or can afford) a new comp every two years in order to keep pace with technology. okay, that is the way that business is, i understand that (every company wants to sell processors, hd's,...). but: why haven't we been able to augment an applications capabilities/abilities while reducing its size at the same time without giving up on stability?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dunno', I thought that was exactly what Linux was doing?

:lol:

i am not trying to refocus the whole industry in that way. the issues of older people were just an example for showing the "bad sides" of current computers.

 

well, some ten years ago, we also had computers in business and the stuff they had was sufficcient. why ain't it sufficient today? because we think that way or do we really need every year new machines that work faster and are more powerful? (i can still write a letter by using pen and paper. i don't really need a 4 mhz comp to write something or draw some lines. or am i wrong? ;) )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are taking a narrow view of buisness computing, from groupware to interactive content, things have gotten a bit beyond opening Edit and banging out some text. And I'm not aware of too many businesses or home users who upgrade every year (excluding the gamers we mentioned above), it's more of an ebb and flow where some users keep their technology to squeeze out "just a little more value" while some are ready for new features and power "now". Neither party is wrong, so why alter the progress of technology if everyone is satisfied and something worthy exist at every price point?

You are starting to sound like a Luddite :unsure: ? :D Yes you can use a pen and paper to write anything, but then without the technology we are using right now I wouldn't be reading your response to this for several day, and all of these other people couldn't join in the discussion. Sure, we could have done this more than 10 years ago sitting at a green screen, but if accessibility is your concern, hasn't this (albeit sometimes difficult) technology made this whole discussion more accessible?

Arctic, let me say up front you are a deep thinker, and I thuroughly enjoy having this discussion with you, but it's this bloated technology that makes it all possible.