Hello, I have 9.2 installed on a Dual Opteron and want to upgrade to 9.3. Has anyone had any success with upgrading? Curious to see if anyone has had any good results before I scrub the OS and do a fresh install. Thanks in advance, James
James D. Parra <Jamesp@musicreports.com> wrote:
Hello,
I have 9.2 installed on a Dual Opteron and want to upgrade to 9.3. Has anyone had any success with upgrading? Curious to see if anyone has had any good results before I scrub the OS and do a fresh install.
I had some GRUB blues on my Thinkpad (not AMD64 but this seems not to be a 64 specific issue) and am running LILO now. Everything else worked fine. The beta OOo coming with 9.3 is unusable, though, it keeps crashing every other minute, and it displays PPT files like shit. Insofar 9.2 was way better. Maybe I'll install the most recent 1.3 OOo on the box. USB recognition is different from 9.2. 9.2 created the mountpoint for my memory stick as /media/usb-07..... sonething, and 9.3 creates /media/MEMORYSTICK which corresponds with the VFAT partition name. While this is certainly more sensible than /media/goobledigook, it potentially breaks some shell scripts. What bugs me is that 9.3 takes even longer to boot than 9.2, and 9.2 was way slower than 9.1. --
Harald Milz <hm@seneca.muc.de> writes:
James D. Parra <Jamesp@musicreports.com> wrote:
Hello,
I have 9.2 installed on a Dual Opteron and want to upgrade to 9.3. Has anyone had any success with upgrading? Curious to see if anyone has had any good results before I scrub the OS and do a fresh install.
I had some GRUB blues on my Thinkpad (not AMD64 but this seems not to be a 64 specific issue) and am running LILO now. Everything else worked fine.
The beta OOo coming with 9.3 is unusable, though, it keeps crashing every other minute, and it displays PPT files like shit. Insofar 9.2 was way better. Maybe I'll install the most recent 1.3 OOo on the box.
Try the one at ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/aj - or one from ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/OpenOffice_org/
USB recognition is different from 9.2. 9.2 created the mountpoint for my memory stick as /media/usb-07..... sonething, and 9.3 creates /media/MEMORYSTICK which corresponds with the VFAT partition name. While this is certainly more sensible than /media/goobledigook, it potentially breaks some shell scripts.
What bugs me is that 9.3 takes even longer to boot than 9.2, and 9.2 was way slower than 9.1.
That's sad to here. We'll try to improve it and if you have some great ideas on what can be done, speak up, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> wrote:
[-- text/plain, Encoding quoted-printable, Zeichensatz: iso-8859-1, 38 Zeilen --]
Harald Milz <hm@seneca.muc.de> writes:
I had some GRUB blues on my Thinkpad (not AMD64 but this seems not to be a 64 specific issue) and am running LILO now. Everything else worked fine.
Just upgraded another box, and no GRUB problem here. Maybe the TP experience was a single event.
Try the one at ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/aj - or one from ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/OpenOffice_org/
OK, THX.
What bugs me is that 9.3 takes even longer to boot than 9.2, and 9.2 was way slower than 9.1.
That's sad to here. We'll try to improve it and if you have some great ideas on what can be done, speak up,
If I knew that... I guess accelerating everything requires a more thorough analysis than I can seriously do. From what I see more and more things are being done during boot, and it's no wonder everything slows down. 9.1 booted faster than Windows XP on my Thinkpad T41 (P4M 1.5 GHz, 1 GB RAM), but since 9.2 everything has been slower. Although 9.3 attempts to start KDE earlier than 9.3 - the time until the desktop is up and running is definitely longer. One more difference between pre-9.3 and 9.3: YaST now wants at least 256 MB. This broke my VDR and my ex-wife's box which both had 128 MB and were running okay. On 9.3, YaST is so memory hungry that an install with 128 MB is nearly impossible because the machine keeps swapping like hell, and i.a.w. vmstat the machine spends most of the time in I/O wait. Not that memory prices were that high - you just can't seriously put a 9.3 DVD into a 128 meg machine and upgrade. In my case, I had to stop the upgrade after more than two hours when overall progress was at 11%. I stuck a 512er RAM into it and off it went. On a 256 meg machine I'd recommend running the install in text mode because in X mode, the install at some points wants more than 350 megs. I would hope that with 10.0, systems requirements can be turned down again, at least to a point comparable with Windows XP. I'm currently running a Linux desktop migration study for a large customer, and I just can't explain to them they need to buy RAM for some machines in order to save money with Linux ... as far as boot times, users may be tempted to leave their machines on overnight instead of shutting them down, which will drive the energy costs up. Soooo ... NLD10 at least should be less resource hungry than SL9.3. Who's currently in charge with product management? --
On Sunday 10 July 2005 18:48, Harald Milz wrote:
Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> wrote:
[-- text/plain, Encoding quoted-printable, Zeichensatz: iso-8859-1, 38 Zeilen --]
Harald Milz <hm@seneca.muc.de> writes:
I had some GRUB blues on my Thinkpad (not AMD64 but this seems not to be a 64 specific issue) and am running LILO now. Everything else worked fine.
Just upgraded another box, and no GRUB problem here. Maybe the TP experience was a single event.
Hope so ;-)
Try the one at ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/people/aj - or one from ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/projects/OpenOffice_org/
OK, THX.
What bugs me is that 9.3 takes even longer to boot than 9.2, and 9.2 was way slower than 9.1.
That's sad to here. We'll try to improve it and if you have some great ideas on what can be done, speak up,
If I knew that... I guess accelerating everything requires a more thorough analysis than I can seriously do. From what I see more and more things are being done during boot, and it's no wonder everything slows down. 9.1
We also gain - hotplug should work much better. For the next release the udev maintainer have rewritten most parts of udev to gain some seconds. Let's see how it works in practice.
booted faster than Windows XP on my Thinkpad T41 (P4M 1.5 GHz, 1 GB RAM), but since 9.2 everything has been slower. Although 9.3 attempts to start KDE earlier than 9.3 - the time until the desktop is up and running is definitely longer.
One more difference between pre-9.3 and 9.3: YaST now wants at least 256 MB. This broke my VDR and my ex-wife's box which both had 128 MB and were running okay. On 9.3, YaST is so memory hungry that an install with 128 MB is nearly impossible because the machine keeps swapping like hell, and i.a.w. vmstat the machine spends most of the time in I/O wait. Not that memory prices were that high - you just can't seriously put a 9.3 DVD into a 128 meg machine and upgrade. In my case, I had to stop the upgrade after more than two hours when overall progress was at 11%. I stuck a 512er RAM into it and off it went. On a 256 meg machine I'd recommend running the install in text mode because in X mode, the install at some points wants more than 350 megs.
I would hope that with 10.0, systems requirements can be turned down again, at least to a point comparable with Windows XP. I'm currently running a Linux desktop migration study for a large customer, and I just can't explain to them they need to buy RAM for some machines in order to save money with Linux ... as far as boot times, users may be tempted to leave their machines on overnight instead of shutting them down, which will drive the energy costs up. Soooo ... NLD10 at least should be less resource hungry than SL9.3. Who's currently in charge with product management?
Feel free to send me something privately and I can forward it, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, aj@suse.de, http://www.suse.de/~aj SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
participants (3)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Harald Milz -
James D. Parra