November 2004 - openSUSE Users - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Fwd: [SLE] which suse distrib do you prefer?
by Synthetic Cartoonz 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

Johannes Cloete asked: >which distrib of suse is better? >is 9.2 & 9.1 truly superior, faster and more stable than suse 9.0? >does the 2.6.x kernel shipped with the later models outperform suse 9.0 that >shipped with kernel 2.4.21? I started at 8.0 Professional, and bought every SuSE Professional version since. I use the most peculiar hardware I have -- my HP5295 laptop -- as the index of success for the distro. With 8.0 Pro hardly anything worked on the laptop. No sound, the CD burner wouldn't burn, USB wasn't functioning worth a darn, and the LAN wasn't working. At that time I had just bought into running Linux after experiencing the third Windows implosion on the laptop in a year. So, the lack of working stuff in 8.0 left me slightly disappointed. But, I managed to eventually make the LAN work, and figured that sooner or later I or someone else would figure out how to get the rest of the hardware running in this or the next version of SuSE. 8.1 Pro and 8.2 Pro saw progressive improvements. In 8.1 the LAN worked immediately after the install, sound and the CD-Burner also started working, tough sound was sometimes sporadic. USB required some personal hacking on a device by device basis. In 8.2, the sound stopped working, but USB support increased dramatically. Most thing I shoved into the USB port would mount without magic incantations. I think 9.0 Pro was really intended to be 8.3 Pro, but SuSE appeared to need to engage in Version Number Wars with other distros. That was the BEST version so far. Everything worked on the laptop. Sound was working without issue this time, and everything I needed was working happily. Some of the power management things didn't work so well, but I wasn't concerned with that, since I don't normally use the laptop without the AC power plugged in. I think 9.1 Pro is the originally intended 9.0 Pro. I get the "dot oh" feeling of being used as someone's unpaid beta tester. Everything is working, but sometimes it works strangely. USB is the biggest problem: USB devices sometimes move locations, so I end up having to remove and recreate icons on the desktop to make mounting/opening/browsing the devices convenient. Hotplugging USB devices often takes an irritatingly long time to recognize that something was plugged in. USB performance and reliability also took a nosedive. Devices that were working fine with 9.0 have intermittent I/O errors. Most annoying. Some recent patches and updates have fixed something, because I'm having far fewer I/O errors. (USB throughput still stinks.) Otherwise, the only improvement I see in 9.1 is that the power management features (that I don't care about) appear to be functioning much better. I just picked up SuSE Pro 9.2 yesterday at CompUSA and it is still on the floor next to my desk. Various computer parts are winging their way to me from a variety of Internet sellers as I write this. In the next week I plan to use 9.2 to build a file and print server for my personal linux boxes in the house (and my wife's nasty Win 98 box.) When that is done I'll start upgrading the other linux systems. to 9.2.

3 2

Openoffice.org 1.1.3 rpms for Suse 9.1
by Osho GG 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

Hi, Does anyone know where to download the Openoffice.org 1.1.3 rpms for suse 9.1 I currently have 1.1.1. thanks, -- Osho

3 2

OCR -9.1
by Mike McMullin 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

I am looking for a good OCR package for 9.1, I do not have an installed scanner. Does anyone have any suggestions or experience that could be helpful? Mike

2 2

Re: [SLE] which suse distrib do you prefer?
by Synthetic Cartoonz 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

Johannes Cloete asked: >Thanx for the info. >I build production desktop servers. >I am thus unable to allow my clients to take part in a beta test while I'm >the one getting paid. >(if I may coin your phrase) >My primary concern is: >Is the improvements in post Suse 9.0 editions worth the effort of potential >gremlin hunting & kernel hacking. If you're building servers (file server, database server, network firewalls?) then you may be talking about boxes that a lot of people do not log into and use directly. So, the quirks that come with some configuration or application changes may not be so evident to them. I guess I will add that getting the Samba server working on my personal linux box, so my wife could access some disk space for her Win98 box was nearly trivial on 9.1. In 8.2 it didn't work very easily at all. >Was it for you? For me, yes, but I'm willing to do some suffering and head scratching, since these are all computers in my home.

1 0

Where's Scribus?
by James Hatridge 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

Hi all... I've got the 5 disk 9.2 version of SuSE. I tried to install Scribus but YAST could not find it. I though that it was on the disks. Did anyone else have this problem? What do I do? Thanks, JIM -- Jim Hatridge Linux User #88484 ------------------------------------------------------ WartHog Bulletin Info about new German Stamps http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/bulletin Viel Feind -- Viel Ehr' Anti-US Propaganda stamp collection http://www.fuzzybunnymilitia.org/~hatridge/collection

7 7

tiocgdev kernel patch
by Johannes Cloete 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

I am repatching a stock standard 2.4.27 kernel dor use with suse 9.0 I am told that in order to logging not to break, I have to obtain the tiocgdev kernel patch. I have no idea where to find it Is anyone able to help? -- Johannes Cloete Tel: +27 82 224 8324 (Mobile) +27 12 804 9700 (Office Hours) -- Johannes Cloete Tel: +27 82 224 8324 (Mobile) +27 12 804 9700 (Office Hours)

5 7

Why am I paying SuSE for a distro if the software developers bundle the software?
by me＠prestoncrawford.com 21 Nov '04

21 Nov '04

I asked SuSE support about the lack of Gnome Conduits and this is what I got... "Unfortunatly it is up to the developer of the software to package it up for each distribution they wish to support, unfortunatly, if the package is not available for SuSE linux all I could suggest would be searching for the sources and compiling it on your system, beyond that theres not much we could do." So... (SuSE team listening) does this mean that every single RPM installed in SuSE is provided by the people who developed the software? The Kernel, Gnome, KDE, all of that comes to SuSE already ready to go. SuSE doesn't do anything, really. What, then, does SuSE do? Burn them all onto a CD for me? Seriously, this is the most ridiculous response I've ever received from a SuSE rep. I don't, for a minute, believe that the developers of Gnome-pilot-conduits created RPMs, packages, etc. for Mandrake, Fedora, Ark Linux, FreeBSD, Debian, etc. but not for SuSE. That's absurd. All I wanted was a straight answer and I got the biggest line of bull ever. Preston

4 3

Problems with bash and perl execution
by Ed Harrison 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

Something has happened throughout my system. Before my problem the error message when trying to install crossover 4.0 was: "install-crossover-standard-4.0.sh: ./setup.sh: /bin/sh: bad interpreter: Permission denied" I have discovered that I get this error whenever I execute ANY bash script file, and now perl. Also, when I try to run cxsetup or cxreset I get the following: "ed@linux:~/cxoffice/bin> ./cxreset [or cxsetup] bash: ./cxreset: /usr/bin/perl: bad interpreter: Permission denied" The permissions on /bin/sh, /bin/bash and /usr/bin/perl are all 755. If I use "bash" in front of the file name, it works. With perl, I get different error messages with different files, but none will execute. These have worked for months, and I have no idea what has happened to change them What could be causing this? Ed Harrison SuSE 9.1, Kernel 2.6.9-vanilla PolarBar Mailer 1.25a

3 2

Re: [SLE] upgrade 9.2 partitions question
by steve-ss 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

On Saturday 20 November 2004 12:30, Paul Cartwright wrote: > On Saturday 20 November 2004 6:24 am, steve-ss wrote: > > I want to upgrade a box from 9.1 to 9.2. The only > > partition I can select for upgrade is / (the one with > > fstab on it). All the others are marked 'unknown'. What > > about these others I have, /var, /usr, /srv and so on? > > I want to upgrade those as well. Will yast mount them > > and upgrade those too? > > I think it will look at your current fstab once you > select the "/" partition. It did for me, as I had a /home > partition and it continued to use it after the upgrade, > yet I never selected it during the install. > Hi and thanks. I wouldn't expect it to touch /home but I would expect it to update for example /usr and not just what's left in /. Surely it won't leave me with an upgraded to 9.2 / and a left as it is /usr, 9.1. Anyone? Cheers, Steve.

3 2

radeon framebuffer 9.2
by steve-ss 20 Nov '04

20 Nov '04

In 9.1 my radeon ve card ran flicker free at 1280x1024. Under 9.2 it won't run at this resolution unless I use the framebuffer. Sax2 throws up a 1024x768 screen which is flicker free but slow. The framebuffer screams in comparison but doesn't play 3d games and it flickers. I see that ATI don't support Linux. Is this something to do with the move the new SuSE X.org? Is there anyway I can go back to use the 9.1 graphics with 9.2? Cheers, Steve.

1 0