I have an old Pentium 3 on which I would like to install a Linux (Ubuntu based) distro. This PC will mostly be used for browsing, send/receive emails, and maybe writing some documents. Before this machine had Windows XP installed on it and it wasn't that bad. I am hoping that with Linux I can get this system to be even faster and more responsive.
At first I was going to install Xubuntu but I had some problems in having the keyboard recognised. I therefore was wondering if I could install Ubuntu (10.04) - which did recognise the keyboard - instead. What scares me with Ubuntu is that I am afraid that it might be too heavy weight for a Pentium 3 with 1GB of Ram.
I have windows xp.I ran a blue ray rip on my P3 with following options
-lavdopts lowres=1:fast:skiploopfilter=all
-vf scale=640:272 (because my computer supports max resolution 1024x768 while original video is 1280x528)
Yet the video is slower than audio. Can I do anything else to play this ? Or How can I convert the file to lower resolution video maintaining quality & small size using ffmpeg or mencoder? here are file specifications
Code:
$ffmpeg -i /data/sumeet/video/hollywood/blood diamonds/blood diamonds-2006.mkv FFmpeg version git-1dbd813, Copyright (c) 2000-2010 the FFmpeg developers built on Oct 1 2010 19:28:12 with gcc 4.4.3
I am trying to install Ubuntu 10/10 on Mac PowerPC G3 laptop 500mhz with 320mb ram.I have downloded the ppc version but there is no xserver in live cd.I google it and it seems it is a common problem.I try to fill in empty xorg.conf from one post but it is not working . I tried to restart gnome but it is blank I have to alt-f1 to drop into shell.Display Chipset Model is ATi,RageM3 and it is 8mb agp.
I have installed Debian Lenny with LXDE on a Dual USB 500Mhz iBook g3 the login screen appears displaying the screen using "800x600" pixels with the screen resolution at "1024x768" - so the login screen fills 2/3 of the LCD with black space to the right and the image repeating itself in the bottom 1/3 of the screen The "System Tools" > "Monitors Settings" only list one setting size of "800x600" and "Auto" After trying to search for answers I have tried editing the /etc/X11/xorg.conf file (after stopping gdm and rebooting afterwards)
# ... after these lines Section "Screen" Identifier "Default Screen"
[code]...
But nothing changes.
I have also tried [ dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg ] but there is no prompt for resolution
I have a linux box set up as a multi-purpose server for my home with three Windows client PC's. The linux box is based on a slightly modified Slackware 9.0 distribution using Linux 2.4.20 and an unfortinately old, slow AMD processor with a miserable 512Kb RAM. The linux box serves the CIFS file system to the Windows boxes, runs the SQUID HTTP proxy, the Apache web server, a print server, does masquerading, mail serving and a very effective firewall using iptables.
This system, although slow, has run perfectly for several years.Let me say that again - This system works perfectly.I had decided that now is the time to upgrade the hardware, so I bought a Gigabyte LGA775 motherboard which has two 1Gb network interfaces on it, an ASUS 256Mb PCI-E display card, 2Gb of DDR3 RAM, an Intel Core2-Quad processor and a bunch of 500Gb SATA drives to set up a RAID5 array (but I intend that the system boot off one of several 40Gb PATA drives I have).I set up the processor, motherboard, display card, RAM, a SATA DVD Drive and a 40Gb PATA hard disk in a "breadboard" layout and installed distro 13.1, being careful to set up the static IP for the local network, dhcpcd to get an IP address from the cable modem (my internet connection) and to enable ip_forward in the network configuration.
Then I installed a script invoked by /etc/rc.d/rc.local which installed all the SAME iptables rules as my old Linux box. There was one minor glitch when I had to change 8 occurrences of "-d ! $LOCAL_NET to" "! --destination $LOCAL_NET" but that was no problem. I also set up /etc/resolv.conf, /etc/hosts , the BIND server files etc. etc. exactly as in the old box.
I am able to ping mirror.aarnet.edu.au (this is at the heart of Australia's internet hub network - if it's down the whole bloody thing is down) and have the system find the correct IP from the designated nameservers and contact that server with a return trip time of 35ms. I am able to run a telnet session from one of the Windows boxes and edit files on the Linux server. So both network interfaces work and I've got them the right way around.I am able to run FTP on one of the Windows boxes and connect through to mirror.aarnet.edu.au, although it seems to hang when I try a DIR (but then so does the old linux system).
Lubuntu is nice - but it seems the LXDE version is not as up to date as Fedora LXDE Spin or even Debian squeeze with LXDE installed. I do like Chromium on Lubuntu though... its faster and a nice touch. I am looking for a lightweight 64-bit distribution for my main laptop (it is by no means "old" or "low spec" but I like that Lubuntu starts up in like 2 secs).
LXDE version seems not to be recent (esp in 10.04 version which seems to work more stably for me - with Nvidia drivers etc)64 bit install is currently a pain - requires first install of minimal CD or alternate CD both of which required wired Ethernet, then install of lubuntu from PPA. Native 64-bit support would be nice. Linux Mint LXDE, for example, is also only 32-bit.
I have been using ubuntu for ages now and is 1 of my fav operating systems.
I would however like a distro which is ubuntu based except its basically blank.
for example there is a distro called tiny core linux (and micro core linux is the command line version) at 6 and 10 mb depending on which 1 u get.
I would basically like a distro like the micro core linux at 6mb but ubuntu based so i can build it from scratch exactly how i like without all the crap i dont want or use, which i can obviously insall ubuntu compiled apps on.
i kno there is linux from scratch but after playing for a short while its just 2 'scratchy' for me.
I have an old PC that runs win XP (slowish...) and was my faithful PC for 5 years. Alas, its RAM has degraded and it never had a graphics card to speak of, but it has a nice 1.6GHz CPU and a 80GB HDD. I'm thinking of using it has the network storage server, or just a second backup PC - and I want it as a file server to store my extra stuff.
Specs: RAM: 192MBs (really degraded) CPU: 1.6GHz AMD KM400 graphics: A graphics chip of 16MBs HDD: 80GBs
It also has a optical drive capable of reading DVDs and writing CDs (but I'm not so sure on that one) and 6 USB ports. Which distro should I go for? I was thinking Xubuntu, and I don't want a server edition as me and CLIs are fine but not friends!
My Desktop only has a 60GB HDD which I am running Linux Xuuntu on. I just found a 40GB HDD that I install into the desktop as well. What I really wanna do with it is wipe it clean and then format it to be accessible from my Linux Distro like "Extra Memory" for storing things like music etc. I'm having trouble doing this. It reads in Gparted but not quite sure what I need to do to do this.
We work in school, and create linux distro for her. Manager wanted "Original name for distro", is "Education OS of School Patrik". How change name in distro? "Ubuntu" on "Education OS....".
which linux distro should be used on a tablet pc. Some of them may seem unrelated, but they are not. I am looking to buy a very thin, very lightweight tablet pc, just like the ipad. However, I can not get the Ipad itself, because it does not have a USB port, and I must have at least one USB port on the tablet.
1. Which linux distro would you install on a tablet pc, (such as the ipad or archos 9) and why? I would like to be able to run a windows OS, simply because that is what I am accustomed to. But alas, I can not. The perfect tablet for me was canceled for this very reason. The HP "Slate". As was the Microsoft brand "Courier" tablet. They were both going to run some lighter weight version of Windows 7, but even that drained the battery so fast that HP ended up canceling the product. So I have to come up with another good OS, that is very lightweight. I really like the look of Kubuntu. Is there any reason I shouldn't install Kubuntu on my tablet PC?
2. Is there a linux mobile? You know how they have windows, mobile, and apple has their little mobile mac OS? Is there a linux mobile type of GUI OS that Would be beneficial to a tablet? Or is linux so conservative on resources, that I could install a full linux OS on a tablet PC such as the joo joo or ipad?
3. Would the system requirements of Kubuntu/Ubunutu/any other distro be easier on a tablet PC's resources than some of the other available OS's for tablets? Do I even have that part right? I am assuming that I can get a full OS on a tablet if I just use a linux distro. But it has to have all the goods. Such as...everything. All the stuff that you would come to expect from a good, full OS. Not some hacked off, scaled down version made to just barely work, so you lose a lot of functionality. 3-D games excluded, of course. I am talking about good touch screen support, good wireless network support, Bluetooth, 3G, webcam, the works.
4. Do you think that apps from Google's android OS would work on Ubuntu/Kubuntu? It is linux based, supposedly. So therefore maybe some of the apps might work?
5. Why are there so many versions of Kubuntu? For example: Right now, 9.1 is available. But they are working on 10.01. So uh... what are you missing out on by just keeping kubuntu 9 and not upgrading to kubuntu 10? I am used to windows, where any updates are free through "Windows Update". So can you just update from kubuntu 9 to kubuntu 10 without having to wipe your hard drive and install a new OS? How does all that work? How does kubuntu/ubuntu differ when it comes to the update process? I don't want to be behind and miss out on new functionality, but at the same time I don't want to have to wipe my hard drive and install the latest version of the distro every year and a half or two years. Can't you just continually update like with windows? I don't think that you can, cause all the linux distros that I have tried, have all said something like "This distribution will be supported until 9/9/99" or something like that. That is a fake date, but you get the idea. They have an expiration date, and if you want all the latest and greatest goodies, then you need to update to the newest version of the distro. I just don't understand how the update process works with linux, at all.
6. And a last, seemingly unrelated question. Do the Android phones do the whole jailbreak thing? Can they become like little wireless routers like the iphone can? This may also be a reason to use google's android OS on my tablet.
I am trying to introduce Linux to 7th Grade kids in my society. I have got some very very old PC's with 128MB RAM and some with 256 MB RAM. The processor speed is 1GHZ to 1.5GHZ for most of them. which Linux Distribution will be suitable for it. I want to install them on Hard Disk & rather than booting from the USB drives every time.
my names IAN I'm a Ubuntu and Debian user i have a hp desktop I'm working on P4 2.6ghz 2gigs DDR333 80gig wester digital Nvidia Geforce 7600gs 350watt P/supply in a BIG OLD custom asus case plus LED fans so no overheating issues =) [URL] i have tried and failed to install pretty much everything in my dvd case Ubuntu 10.04+10.1 and Mint both Debian and Deb-net install fedora 13 openSUSE 10 nothing worked ALL RANDOMLY crash or freeze during the file transfer/installation and i mean RANDOM i have been unable to produce the same results twice.
i did as expected i searched Google and trouble shooted and all i can think of is bad ram so i ran memtest86 by pass 5 i had over 1000 errors have i found my bottle neck?? is it common to have so many that errors with the ram test Windows 7 seems to be the only thing that will load wye will shitty windows install and run fine NO lag when i cant get anything thing else passed a file transfer?? oh and has a new hard drive/thats not the issue. i first posted this in the Debian forums but after failing to get Ubuntu to run either i came to the friendly local forum
I have been using Ubuntu 10.10 for a few days now, it is a nice OS but at times I feel its bloated and feel even slower than windows xp or even my windows 7 which I'm dual booting. I'm looking for a distro that's similar speed wise to windows xp while still being relatively easy to use/install as well as a gui.
I am considering installing Linux on my workstation to develop and run fortran codes much faster than windows. I wonder if there is significant speed difference between Linux distros. Especially between Redhat and Ubuntu or Debian. I havent used any Linux distro longer enough to have an idea about its speed while running long codes.
How do I move a custom theme from a 7.10 distro on my hardrive to the 9.10 distro on the same hardrive? It's probably easy. I want to remove the 7.10 version but don't want to lose a custom theme I put together.
If I install let's say Mandriva after Ubuntu, can I then just delete the partitions that it made to get rid of it or will this affect Ubuntu or else how can I get rid of it if I don't want it?
I am curious if anyone has played around with this desktop environment? I would love to see a Linux distro use this as default. I think one thing Mac does well is self contained apps. Has anyone been able to get ROX to work on Ubuntu? Does anyone know of a distro that uses ROX as the default environment?
I'd like to put Sabayon 5.2 onto a 2GB USB pen in order to install on a PC. However when I opened UNetbootin I noticed the highest version for Sabayon was 4 [picture attached]. Is it worth trying? Otherwise what is the best alternative to UNetbootin?
He's on dial-up so getting updates and installing packages such as restricted extras would be painful. I'm thinking Mint but have little personal experience with distros beyond Ubuntu.
I've got a machine with P4 1.6GHz and 512M ram. It's a bit laggy when running ubuntu 9.10. Especially after i open up Eclipse, things start to get very slow. I'm thinking about installing Xubuntu, but am wondering if installing debian(or arch) then xfce would be equivalent to installing Xubuntu, or would it be faster when using debian(or arch)+xfce combination?
Reason why I'm thinking about this is that the Ubuntu family including Xubuntu, tendd to integrate too much stuff for ease of use, while installing system from scratch and then building up from that could avoid those unnecessary extra features. What do you guys think?
I'm about to receive a new Zotac MAG MAGHD-ND01-U and I'm wondering if perhaps it would be smarter to install UNE instead of the standard distribution. The computer will be used almost exclusively as an HTPC using Boxee. I've read that UNE has atom optimized code; that along with a smaller footprint may speed up the overall system.
I've been wanting to play around with the idea of switching to a tiling wm. So I started up virtual box and installed Ubuntu minimal, then installed awesome, gdm, terminator, Firefox, gedit, and a few other trinkets. What I would like to know, is their any other programs that work good, and look decent in awesome. I switched to terminator from gnome-terminal because I like the look of terminator better when it is in awesome. Also, is their any distro that use awesome by default, I may be able to play around with or get ideas from? Post some screen shots, I'm interested in how everyone else is set up. Once, i get mine set up to fit me, i'm going to remastersys it, and use it on my production machine.
I heard that Arch Linux actually only consists of command lines (Terminal), but I never seen how it looks.Does a command line environment help more in programming? And Is there a way to delete one Linux distro in order to replace it with say, Arch or Kubuntu Linux?I'm a little bit interested in Kubuntu and Arch more than Ubuntu basically but need to know if they're going to be hard to get accustomed to or not.
I can't figure out how to remove a Ubuntu distro in grub that I no long have installed. I have Win 7, Ubuntu 10.4 installed but when I boot my grub menu shows Win 7, Ubuntu 10.4 and Ubuntu 10.10 that I have removed from my hard drive but still shows up in the menu. I have been trying many commands in the terminal menu to edit grub but nothing shows me how to remove a menu entry.
I want to take an existing ISO, like Xubuntu 10.10, and edit it before I install it. For instance, I don't need Orage, most of the games, the file sharing apps, etc., but do want Ubuntu Tweak, Audacious, Audacity, etc. Is it possible to do this from a GUI in a reasonably straightforward manner?I've played around with remastersys and ISO Master. The former apparently doesn't do what I want, since it only works on the distro I already have installed, and I can't figure out how to get the latter to work. The instructions on the community documentation involve more command line work than I feel comfortable with, plus you can't edit a 32-bit iso on a 64-bit machine, and I need to be able do to that. I want to set up the distro to run on my 32-bit netbook.
I'm excited to try Linux/Ubuntu, but I hate command line - I've tried to use it before with disastrous results, so I'd like to try something that requires the least amount of command line use -- or none at all, if possible. I'm not looking for a Windows-clone per se, just something light that will work well on my netbook, and which is entirely GUI for everything/most things that it needs to do.
