[opensuse] USB startup stick
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore. I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick. In earlier snapshots was a program in the applications - the name I forgot - that made it possible to make a startup stick. How can I solve this problem? T.i.a. André den Oudsten -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 09/02/2019 à 10:47, A. den Oudsten a écrit :
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
no problem here with 42.3, I guess you use tumblweed?
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick.
use a bigger stick :-) preferably an usb3 one, much faster
In earlier snapshots was a program in the applications - the name I forgot - that made it possible to make a startup stick.
several names, fe imagewriter, or suse studio image writer, but dd do the job but you have to use a live image, depending of what you want to do with the stick jdd -- http://dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Op zaterdag 9 februari 2019 10:47:45 CET schreef A. den Oudsten:
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick.
You need a USB stick equal or larger than 4.4 GB, which in practice means 8 GB. The 4.4 GB fits on a DVD.
In earlier snapshots was a program in the applications - the name I forgot - that made it possible to make a startup stick.
SUSE Studio Imagewriter, but still you need the above mentioned size. You may also use the NET image, which is much smaller. However, your problem may be caused by the change with /etc/resolv.conf. Run "netconfig update -f" as root and your problem might be gone. -- fr.gr. member openSUSE Freek de Kruijf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Op 09-02-19 om 11:55 schreef Freek de Kruijf:
Op zaterdag 9 februari 2019 10:47:45 CET schreef A. den Oudsten:
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick. You need a USB stick equal or larger than 4.4 GB, which in practice means 8 GB. The 4.4 GB fits on a DVD. I tried twice a 8 GiB as well as a 16 GiB
In earlier snapshots was a program in the applications - the name I forgot - that made it possible to make a startup stick. SUSE Studio Imagewriter, but still you need the above mentioned size. I hope it will come back
You may also use the NET image, which is much smaller.
However, your problem may be caused by the change with /etc/resolv.conf. Run "netconfig update -f" as root and your problem might be gone.
This solved my problem!! Thanks André
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/02/2019 14.40, A. den Oudsten wrote:
Op 09-02-19 om 11:55 schreef Freek de Kruijf:
Op zaterdag 9 februari 2019 10:47:45 CET schreef A. den Oudsten:
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick. You need a USB stick equal or larger than 4.4 GB, which in practice means 8 GB. The 4.4 GB fits on a DVD. I tried twice a 8 GiB as well as a 16 GiB
Then you are doing something wrong: [ ] openSUSE-Tumbleweed-DVD-x86_64-Snapshot20190205-Media.iso 05-Feb-2019 15:55 4.2G Details [ ] openSUSE-Tumbleweed-GNOME-Live-x86_64-Snapshot20190205-Media.iso 05-Feb-2019 16:14 944M Details [ ] openSUSE-Tumbleweed-KDE-Live-x86_64-Snapshot20190205-Media.iso 05-Feb-2019 16:11 950M Details <http://download.opensuse.org/tumbleweed/iso/>
However, your problem may be caused by the change with /etc/resolv.conf. Run "netconfig update -f" as root and your problem might be gone.
This solved my problem!!
Wonderful! :-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On 02/09/2019 03:47 AM, A. den Oudsten wrote:
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick.
In earlier snapshots was a program in the applications - the name I forgot - that made it possible to make a startup stick.
How can I solve this problem?
That seems like using a sledgehammer as a fly-swatter... Why not just troubleshoot the internet connection issue. Like checking the journal entries (I'd just open a separate terminal) $ sudo journalctl --no-pager --full --follow Then in another, as root $ rc network restart See what the errors point to as the culprit and then post the error messages here. Even if you successfully write an image and boot from it and all is good, all you have confirmed is there is something broken in the current snapshot. (you know that already) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 09/02/2019 10.47, A. den Oudsten wrote:
After 2019-02-01 update Thunderbird and Firefox could not make connection with Internet anymore.
Only them? Did you try other tools? Please do: ping google.com ping 8.8.8.8 and paste here. Ok, no internet, so hand copy. Or take a photo and upload to susepaste and post a link.
I want to make now a startup USB stick, but the snapshot file 2019-02-05 is too big to copy to the USB stick.
Snapshot? Are you really sure you want to create a copy of your system snapshot to an USB stick? What are you going to do with it? Or do you mean a installation ISO image? In that case, I think that trying to solve a networking issue with reinstallation is a bit excessive, no? -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On 2019-02-09 4:47 a.m., A. den Oudsten wrote:
[...]
How can I solve this problem?
LOL! A system on a stick is a great idea. I have a few of them, sadly not openSUSE, but I wish ... They are useful when buying a new laptop; plug in the USB stick and see it it can boot Linux. My 'not openSUSE' qualification is that the ones I use, principally Knoppix[1], seem to 'compressed', not just in the stick bu 'in memory', that is they can run even on my father's old, otherwise clapped out, Windows 3 laptop with just 256K of memory. How? beats me. Slow? Yes, but it boots and works. So of anyone knows a way to do a LiveCD/LiveUSB of openSUSE post 2015 that's compressed I'd be interested. I suspect the OP will be as well. Give me a reason not to throw out the masses of less than 1G USB sticks I have :-) [1] Yes, I know, Knoppix will run on hardware that no other Linux will run, including ubuntu. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2019-02-09 at 07:56 -0500, Anton Aylward wrote:
So of anyone knows a way to do a LiveCD/LiveUSB of openSUSE post 2015 that's compressed I'd be interested. I suspect the OP will be as well.
Not compressed AFAIK, but yes, there is one. Not for 42.x, only for 15.0, or pre Leap. <http://download.opensuse.org/distribution/leap/15.0/live/> Gnome, KDE, and Rescue (XFCE). I know that the rescue image is writeable and IIRC not installable (ie, it lacks the installer to install to HD from it). On the other hand, zypper works and you can add packages to it. It fits a 1 G stick, yes. Wonderful thing :-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHoEARECADoWIQQZEb51mJKK1KpcU/W1MxgcbY1H1QUCXF7SBhwccm9iaW4ubGlz dGFzQHRlbGVmb25pY2EubmV0AAoJELUzGBxtjUfVj20An0ftpzCLNWlB6UHaBQok djijeRXvAJ9kubcpTr5+HUsWEC93mT90HzNijA== =+QLg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2/9/19 1:56 PM, Anton Aylward wrote:
My 'not openSUSE' qualification is that the ones I use, principally Knoppix[1], seem to 'compressed', not just in the stick bu 'in memory', that is they can run even on my father's old, otherwise clapped out, Windows 3 laptop with just 256K of memory. How? beats me. Slow? Yes, but it boots and works.
I'm just curious here. 256 MB, not kB? I have used computers with much less than 256 kB of RAM but they barely qualify as "laptops". OTOH, though, a 256 MB machine with Windows 3? That would be a _lot_ of memory for Windows 98, and I think Win95 wouldn't even boot with that much. But Windows *3*? -- Liam Proven - Technical Writer, SUSE Linux s.r.o. Corso II, Křižíkova 148/34, 186-00 Praha 8 - Karlín, Czechia Email: lproven@suse.com - Office telephone: +420 284 241 084 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 11/02/2019 13.01, Liam Proven wrote:
On 2/9/19 1:56 PM, Anton Aylward wrote:
My 'not openSUSE' qualification is that the ones I use, principally Knoppix[1], seem to 'compressed', not just in the stick bu 'in memory', that is they can run even on my father's old, otherwise clapped out, Windows 3 laptop with just 256K of memory. How? beats me. Slow? Yes, but it boots and works.
I'm just curious here.
256 MB, not kB?
I have used computers with much less than 256 kB of RAM but they barely qualify as "laptops".
I used one laptop with about 1 MiB, back in the day. It might be more, it might be less, too long ago to actually remember (~1995). It was MsDOS, possibly Win 3. The only laptop on the company. 256 K would not run Win 3, at least you needed 640K and then a bit more.
OTOH, though, a 256 MB machine with Windows 3? That would be a _lot_ of memory for Windows 98, and I think Win95 wouldn't even boot with that much. But Windows *3*?
-- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On 2/12/19 11:32 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I used one laptop with about 1 MiB, back in the day. It might be more, it might be less, too long ago to actually remember (~1995). It was MsDOS, possibly Win 3. The only laptop on the company.
I have seen 1 MB laptops, sure. Sony did a series of 286 and 386 aluminium-cased tanks that were very popular among people who did adventurous stuff like round-the-world yachting. But not in 1995, no. These were late-1980s/early-1990s machines. Here's a 1989 advert for 80286-based laptops: https://books.google.cz/books?id=B43yj9NtswMC&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q&f=false By 1995, a normal mid-range PC was a 486 and a cheap laptop was a 386SX with 4MB of RAM. That is _why_ Win95 targeted a 4MB 386: it was a basic spec in 1995. Totally agreed re Win3, though. It would just barely crawl along in Real Mode in 640 kB of RAM, run OK in Standard Mode in 2 MB of RAM on a 286, and 386 Enhanced Mode needed a 386 (obviously) and 4 MB of RAM. For the ultimate experience, Windows for Workgroups 3.11 on a 4 MB 386 gave you 32-bit Disk Access (also in ordinary Windows 3.1) but also 32-bit *file* access... via a driver called VFAT.VXD, which is why the Linux FAT driver is called VFAT. -- Liam Proven - Technical Writer, SUSE Linux s.r.o. Corso II, Křižíkova 148/34, 186-00 Praha 8 - Karlín, Czechia Email: lproven@suse.com - Office telephone: +420 284 241 084 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 12/02/2019 12.56, Liam Proven wrote:
On 2/12/19 11:32 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I used one laptop with about 1 MiB, back in the day. It might be more, it might be less, too long ago to actually remember (~1995). It was MsDOS, possibly Win 3. The only laptop on the company.
I have seen 1 MB laptops, sure. Sony did a series of 286 and 386 aluminium-cased tanks that were very popular among people who did adventurous stuff like round-the-world yachting.
But not in 1995, no. These were late-1980s/early-1990s machines.
Here's a 1989 advert for 80286-based laptops:
https://books.google.cz/books?id=B43yj9NtswMC&pg=PA202#v=onepage&q&f=false
By 1995, a normal mid-range PC was a 486 and a cheap laptop was a 386SX with 4MB of RAM. That is _why_ Win95 targeted a 4MB 386: it was a basic spec in 1995.
Yes, my own machine then was a 386-SX, possibly with 5 MiB. I still have it in this room. But I have doubts about the laptop: my boss didn't have much money to spare.
Totally agreed re Win3, though. It would just barely crawl along in Real Mode in 640 kB of RAM, run OK in Standard Mode in 2 MB of RAM on a 286, and 386 Enhanced Mode needed a 386 (obviously) and 4 MB of RAM.
For the ultimate experience, Windows for Workgroups 3.11 on a 4 MB 386 gave you 32-bit Disk Access (also in ordinary Windows 3.1) but also 32-bit *file* access... via a driver called VFAT.VXD, which is why the Linux FAT driver is called VFAT.
AHHHH! I did not know that tidbit. Yes, I do remember about the 32-bit access, and the fight to activate it on machines that wouldn't. For those that were too young to be there, activating "32-bit disk access" also meant bypassing the BIOS native code to access the disk, using instead Windows own code, thus not having to switch CPU mode for every block read or write. The speed improvement was a big difference. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On 2/12/19 1:08 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
AHHHH! I did not know that tidbit.
Yes, I do remember about the 32-bit access, and the fight to activate it on machines that wouldn't.
For those that were too young to be there, activating "32-bit disk access" also meant bypassing the BIOS native code to access the disk, using instead Windows own code, thus not having to switch CPU mode for every block read or write. The speed improvement was a big difference.
Yep. VFAT was a bit of the much-delayed Windows 4 project that was backported to WfWg 3.11. It moved all the disk stack into protected mode, so the disk cache was managed by Windows (not DOS). More memory-efficient and faster. This is what permitted Windows 95 -- as Windows 4 was called when it shipped -- to add long filename support. DOS didn't get to access the disk at all when Windows was running, so DOS didn't have to be modified to read or write LFNs, just to ignore them, which was much easier. -- Liam Proven - Technical Writer, SUSE Linux s.r.o. Corso II, Křižíkova 148/34, 186-00 Praha 8 - Karlín, Czechia Email: lproven@suse.com - Office telephone: +420 284 241 084 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
participants (7)
-
A. den Oudsten -
Anton Aylward -
Carlos E. R. -
David C. Rankin -
Freek de Kruijf -
jdd＠dodin.org -
Liam Proven