Fergus Wilde wrote:
On Thursday 27 January 2005 12:34, Basil Chupin wrote:
Carl Hartung wrote:
malcolm wrote:
On Wednesday 26 January 2005 01:24, Joseph Loo wrote:
I just got my AMD 64 and tried to load SUSE 9.2. I started to pick all kinds of installation settings and started the isntall. I keep coming up with files not found e.g., libread-java.
<snip some discussion and lots of good ideas from Carl>
Once power quality, thermal environment and component quality/stability issues have been attended to, _that_ is the time to start troubleshooting the OS & software/setup if problems arise.
Good luck!
- Carl
So what you are suggesting is that people should tailor their systems to suit Suse/Linux rather than the other way around.
Sounds to me like a recipe for disaster for Linux.
Cheers.
I don't think that's a bizarre way of doing things, Basil - Spec your applications, then your OS, then buy hardware that it will run on. Don't randomly go out and buy hardware and then try to get what you need to run on it. However, I would certainly agree that it's hard work trying to get accurate info on what current hardward *will* run well on a given distro.
While I hear what you are saying, it is not a practical approach to computing. How many people do you know who do this? Well, I did try this once but I very quickly found that with SUSE at least the database for "comptatible" hardware is less than absolutely useless not to mention that it is years out of date. The bottom line is that people buy a computer and then go looking for an operating system - and the first one they find which always works for them is M$. I've been running SUSE since v7.1. I have 3 computers of different "makes" and vintage. Minor changes to the h/ware over the years and they all ran SUSE without a hitch UNTIL 9.1 was unleashed. It only works reasonably well on 2 computers which ran v9.0 as the latest version without a single complaint. I tried to install 9.2 last Saturday (ie 6 days ago) and while it installs on one computer, v9.2 point blank REFUSES to install on another computer which ran 9.0 and 9.1: after selecting the partioning and the software to install (SUSE's default selection), the installation simply hangs after 10~15 seconds after it formats the partitions and starts the actual installation. I can look at all the "compatability charts" till I am blue in the face but you will have a hard time convincing me that it is my fault for v9.2 not installing after 9.0 and 9.1 ran OK on this same computer (v9.1 is still installed and I use it to surf the web using Firefox when the mood strikes me). To carry the suggested idea further, every copy of SUSE, and Linux overall for that matter, should then carry a WARNING stating to check out one's system for compatability with Linux and not to waste your money buying Linux unless each and every hardware component is compatible with SUSE/Linux. Do I see such a warning? No. Will I ever see such a warning? No. The only time I ever saw such a WARNING was before XP was released where people were warned that it may not be compatible with some hardware. There was even a self-check available which pointed out any problems when the program was run. A similar warning I believe wil come with Longhorn. But why should there be a warning with Linux anyway when Linux is supposed to work even on la owly 486 computer which is now "decades" (in computer terms) old? Cheers. -- "The absence of alternatives clears the mind marvellously."