Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state. Preston
On Monday May 31 2004 8:12 pm, Preston Crawford wrote:
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state.
I know some are having some problems, but then there are a LOT of us who aren't. I wish I had the answers to most of the issues, but I don't. Fred -- "The only secure Microsoft software is what's still shrink-wrapped in their warehouse..." (Forno)
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Preston Crawford wrote:
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state.
I had two installations go south because of file system corruption. On the third install I did not use LVM partitions and all has been well. -- Stephen Chadfield http://www.chadfield.com/
*** Reply to message from Stephen Chadfield
I had two installations go south because of file system corruption. On the third install I did not use LVM partitions and all has been well.
mine here installed w/ LVM ( don't ask, it wasn't happy if I told it not to, so I let it, I've had no trouble at all. BUT...I think the pro minumum install is better for most folks than the current version of the personal 9.1 ( I have a copy of each, one installed runs fine, the other one has too many problems including a severe lack of things like Evolution.. which is just weird! I know this is a kde company, and it's fine w/ me, I prefer it.. but some of my users like some of the gnome programs on their DTs... For a rank newbie that is too far away for me to go set up the box, I'm thinking Xandros.. tho I don't care for it, it installs a single user and will, it says even live happily w/ a windows partition. ( there are not windows in our organization so I can't test that part... ) oh yeah, I'm using xfs for my file system.. if that matters... I guess it could. Overall, it's an easy install, even the personal installed w/ no complaints. ( On a box that came inside a cow ... can't remember company name ) It just had a lot of lock ups, but IIRC that company still uses some proprietery bits... 8.2 however runs like a charm on it.. and there have been no virii invasions since it was installed. So far the best recomendation.. Home users w/ that last straw... can't even stay online long enough to get whatever patch MS sees fit to finally release!! OTH, those kids were almost born inside a computer ( back when you actually could wander thru it... and the "print outs: were poleroids!) So they aren't afraid of breaking anything... That has been My biggest difficulty w/ folks who want to try but are afraid they "will do something wrong"... silly, that's how we all learned, at least most of us that can read... screw something up and go read the manual to fixor it... duh! -- j -- nemo me impune lacessit it's just an afterthought; okay ? : What the heck's a tree doing in a forest???
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 04:18, jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:
OTH, those kids were almost born inside a computer ( back when you actually could wander thru it... and the "print outs: were poleroids!) So they aren't afraid of breaking anything... That has been My biggest difficulty w/ folks who want to try but are afraid they "will do something wrong"... silly, that's how we all learned, at least most of us that can read... screw something up and go read the manual to fixor it... duh!
-- j --
I was told to expect to blow up 8 installs as the price for learning. I did that with one weekend with 8.0 a friend gave me. Went and got 8.2 when it came out and no problems. I am not sure where the 8 figure came from I was told its a magic number or some such flubber. Any way Linux is the OS for those willing to pay dues. It does seem strange that the personal is so much more reported troubles. I have use pro since 7.0 and its only gotten better as time went along. Even with help that first one blew up three times in one weekend and took 9 hours on a PI 233 with 64mb and a 2 speed cdrom. but it ran. The PIII 533 with 512mb with a 40x12x48 liteon took a little over an hour with 9.1 plus YOU after. Likely the PII will take a little longer. Linux == Learning Thankfully we have this list and I have a local group for help. I posted a URL for the international listing. If you need help please look for it. CWSIV
Carl William Spitzer IV wrote:
Linux == Learning
Well, I'll chime in on learning:
Mandrake 7.0 (air) on 486, decent install -- much manual updating [major
learning - but at least you learned where all the text config files were and
what they do, 1st Linux install]
Mandrake 7.2 (odyssey) Golden -- best release known to mankind (still
running production server - hell click on the signature url and your there)
Mandrake 8.0 -- Hmm.. something is amiss
Mandrake 8.1 -- middle of the road gcc 2.96 - 3.0x transition -- something
still amiss
Mandrake 8.2 -- better, but something still amiss
Mandrake 9.0 -- (mdk goes public -- Stock offering -- marketing v.
engineering driving releases -- major problems)
Mandrake 9.1 -- (Still suffering from "hurry up and get release number
"next" out for $ regardless of whether it is ready)
Mandrake 9.2 -- Released and then ~ 200 MB of patches released w/i a week --
never installed, Gave up on mdk, bought Suse 8.2 pro.
Suse 8.2 -- Awesome (very painful to transition from mdk to SuSE, but worth
the struggle, splitting smb/nmb (now that was a nice touch), stuff in weird
places, chroot everything, Bind9 [major learning], but everything worked
great!)
Suse 9.0 -- Awesome (price (time, etc.) already paid to learn 8.2, 9.0 was a
sinch -- well except for bind and dhcpd ddns, and those nasty little postfix
config gotchas on receiving mail [procmail should be default])
Suse 9.1 -- waiting -- monitoring list -- hoping that kernel 2.6.(whatever #
we are on settles down)
Suse 9.2 -- Will be my next production machine -- I have great confidence in
you guys, keep up the great work ! SuSE is a wonderful distro. Please don't
fall into the same trap as mdk, history is a great teacher if we are only
willing to listen ; - )
--
David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E.
Rankin * Bertin, PLLC
510 Ochiltree Street
Nacogdoches, Texas 75961
(936) 715-9333
(936) 715-9339 fax
www.rankin-bertin.com
--
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl William Spitzer IV"
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 04:18, jfweber@bellsouth.net wrote:
OTH, those kids were almost born inside a computer ( back when you actually could wander thru it... and the "print outs: were poleroids!) So they aren't afraid of breaking anything... That has been My biggest difficulty w/ folks who want to try but are afraid they "will do something wrong"... silly, that's how we all learned, at least most of us that can read... screw something up and go read the manual to fixor it... duh!
-- j --
I was told to expect to blow up 8 installs as the price for learning. I did that with one weekend with 8.0 a friend gave me. Went and got 8.2 when it came out and no problems.
I am not sure where the 8 figure came from I was told its a magic number or some such flubber. Any way Linux is the OS for those willing to pay dues. It does seem strange that the personal is so much more reported troubles. I have use pro since 7.0 and its only gotten better as time went along. Even with help that first one blew up three times in one weekend and took 9 hours on a PI 233 with 64mb and a 2 speed cdrom. but it ran.
The PIII 533 with 512mb with a 40x12x48 liteon took a little over an hour with 9.1 plus YOU after. Likely the PII will take a little longer.
Linux == Learning
Thankfully we have this list and I have a local group for help.
I posted a URL for the international listing. If you need help please look for it.
CWSIV
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 12:12, Stephen Chadfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Preston Crawford wrote:
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state.
I had two installations go south because of file system corruption. On the third install I did not use LVM partitions and all has been well.
Now this is starting to make sense... does any one without LVM had file corruption problems? I haven't had any, on any of my 3 machines (2 workstations, and a server)... Jerry
-- Stephen Chadfield http://www.chadfield.com/
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 06:30, Jerome R. Westrick wrote:
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 12:12, Stephen Chadfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Preston Crawford wrote:
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state.
I had two installations go south because of file system corruption. On the third install I did not use LVM partitions and all has been well.
Now this is starting to make sense... does any one without LVM had file corruption problems?
I haven't had any, on any of my 3 machines (2 workstations, and a server)...
Jerry
I've had them. All of my installs that got corrupted were straight up installs with primary partitions. Preston
On Tue, 2004-06-01 at 07:38, Preston Crawford wrote: <SNIP>
I've had them. All of my installs that got corrupted were straight up installs with primary partitions.
How old is the drive have you tried the manufacturers preparation utilitys? it does not matter if you must format for winblows Suse can fix that. Also qtparted works nicely in knoppix which I use for emergencys and some experiments. CWSIV
On Tuesday June 1 2004 9:30 am, Jerome R. Westrick wrote: [snip]
Now this is starting to make sense... does any one without LVM had file corruption problems?
I haven't had any, on any of my 3 machines (2 workstations, and a server)...
NADA. Fred -- "The only secure Microsoft software is what's still shrink-wrapped in their warehouse..." (Forno)
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 10:40:52 -0400, you wrote:
On Tuesday June 1 2004 9:30 am, Jerome R. Westrick wrote:
[snip]
Now this is starting to make sense... does any one without LVM had file corruption problems?
I haven't had any, on any of my 3 machines (2 workstations, and a server)...
NADA.
I hate to shoot you in the foot, but I have 1 system without LVM and 3 with. No data corruption. Anywhere. Mike- -- If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough. -- Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed site-wide spam filters at catherders.com. If email from you bounces, try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
On Tuesday 01 June 2004 08:30 am, Jerome R. Westrick wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2004, Preston Crawford wrote:
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1? I'd like to give it a go, but not in its current state.
I had two installations go south because of file system corruption. On the third install I did not use LVM partitions and all has been well.
Now this is starting to make sense... does any one without LVM had file corruption problems?
I did an upgrade to my Compaq 1260 laptop and shortly thereafter I had some major filesystem corruption. Read all the previous stuff about reiserfs and decided to go to ext3. I had been running reiserfs since at least 8.0 with no problems. Just got it back and will now see if that fixes my problem. BTW, I had tried the repair function in yast and it told me I had troubles but it could not fix them. Guess I'll see how long that fix lasts. Richard
Preston Crawford
Curious. I returned my copy after all the problems I was having with filesystem corruption. I'm still not happy with the solution (returning to Fedora), but I have to run SOMETHING. Has anyone figured out a single point of failure as to why so many people such as myself are having random problems with SuSE 9.1?
I've noticed I cannot set DMA for CD-R(W) and DVD-R(W) drives on my 4 machines. I think the DMA was turned on in SUSE 9.0 (2.4 kernel) via "hdparm -d1 /dev/hdc" but when I do it in 2.6 then the OS reports errors in /var/log/messages and finally resets the bus to no DMA. -- A.M.
participants (11)
-
Alexandr Malusek -
Carl William Spitzer IV -
David Rankin -
Fred Miller -
Jack Malone -
Jerome R. Westrick -
jfweber＠bellsouth.net -
Michael W.Cocke -
Preston Crawford -
Richard Atcheson -
Stephen Chadfield