Fails to insatll from a SD card using USB, it looks for a CD rom when there is none... will not allow me to go on without a CD rom? i need to encrypt my drive? why don't the normal cd do this just like the other linux sysetems? hide it if you have to.
View 1 RepliesHalfway through upgrading from 9.10 to 10.04 (i386 desktop) using the Alternate CD, you are prompted to insert "Ubuntu 10.04 LTS _Lucid Lynx_ - Release i386 (20100429)".Luckily, I'd already burnt a full installation CD so swapped this and the run continued for a moment. It then asked for the Alternate CD again (20100427.1).If you haven't got a full install CD handy before you start, you may not be able to complete the upgrade.
View 9 Replies View RelatedThe MD5SUM file on the ubuntu-11.04-alternate-i386.iso disc is wrong. It has an incorrect checksum of 2 files and 18 that are missing or have incorrect names. I'm checking these from a Windows box but that really shouldn't matter. The two incorrect hashes are:
Code:
543f56d91223039621db4cf3b50dde37 ./install/netboot/ubuntu-installer/i386/pxelinux.cfg/default
0ae389801f547ccf19bd6f63c0ab3b7d ./install/netboot/ubuntu-installer/i386/pxelinux.0
I'm showing an MD5 of D41D8CD98F00B204E9800998ECF8427E for both files...
These are the files which appear to be missing or misnamed (the ones I checked appear to be on the disc but are named incorrectly):
Code:
./pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-input-synaptics/xserver-xorg-input-synaptics_1.3.99+git20110116.0e27ce3a-0ubuntu12_i386.deb
./pool/main/x/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau/xserver-xorg-video-nouveau_0.0.16+git20110107+b795ca6e-0ubuntu7_i386.deb
[Code]...
I have an Amd64 processor. I guess that I should install the amd64 alternate cd instead of the i386 installation. What would be better for me and which problems can occur?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have tried to download the latest XFCE Live CD 8.3.0 i386 both by HTTP & torrent & have tried the same at various mirrors but the download consistently fails.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI've tried the Universal USB Installer, but that doesn't support the alternate iso. And if I select the regular desktop one, it screws up the installation when I try to boot.
Unetbootin gives me this error during the cdrom process. It says it can't find copy files from cdrom and stuff. Well of course, there's no cdrom...
i have a Compaq Presario S4020WM
2.0Ghz XP2400 CPU
768Mb RAM
2 40Gb Hdd
and a HD raedon 4650 AGB 1Gb Grafics Card
I have tried to install Ubuntu with this CD and it gets past the keyboard detection part and then it tells me i need to get the CD ROM drivers via removable media, i know this is a problem with ubuntu 10.04 because i can install just fine a 8.04 ubuntu.
i don't know what to do.I have tried to install from a USB but my comp is too old for that, i know its not the specific cd because i'v used about 5 different brands of cd just to see if it was the cds i was uesing,
I would just upgrade from 8.04 to 10.04 but i get to the dbus part and the comp starts to run really slowly and eventually colors just show up, i left it for an hour to see if they would go away and fix but they didn't. Iknow my comp CAN run 10.04 because i have done it before, but i uninstalled and now i can't seem to get it to work again.
P.S. i have tried the live cd, same effect.
Today I decided to replace my 9.04 install with 10.04. (I did this on a separate hard disk.) As I am a big fan of LVM I used the 'Alternate' install CD. Everything installed fine.
However, upon booting I observed two things: firstly there was no grub menu. No countdown timer, no menu. Just a flickering cursor. After 15 seconds or so I got a message telling me that:
Code:
/dev/mapper/bromine-root (My root partition.) does not exist and that it had given up waiting. Finding this kind of strange I tried the alpha of 10.10 --- same again. Hence I have two questions: firstly, where did the nice grub menu go; secondly, what is wrong with LVM and grub these days? At the initframfs prompt I am thrown to there are some LVM utilities and they appear to show my volumes.
Switching back to my old pair of hard disks and everything works as expected (i.e, the hardware is fine and supported by Linux.)
I downloaded the Xubuntu 10.04.2 Alternate Install CD ISO file from http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso...10.04/release/
When I checked the md5sum of the downloaded file, however, there was a mismatch.
The md5sum given at both http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso...elease/MD5SUMS as well as https:[url].... is 209cfc88be17ededb373b601e8defdee *xubuntu-10.04.2-alternate-i386.iso but running the command,
Code:
md5sum xubuntu-10.04.2-alternate-i386.iso generated the following, obviously different checksum for me:
098674ad5a59f0115030c5c0c3973899 xubuntu-10.04.2-alternate-i386.iso
(It also took unusually long to generate the checksum- around thirty minutes.)
Is it possible that the file was corrupted or tampered with on the server?
I cannot install ubuntu on the machine below. It cannot mount the cd-rom drive for some odd reason (SATA drive).
How can i install ubuntu onto this machine?
UPDATE: decided to reinstall and run the partitioner to get rid of the raid. Not worth dealing with this since seems to be lower level as /dev/mapper was not listing any devices. Error 15 at grub points to legacy grub. So avoiding the problem by getting rid of raid for now. So ignore this post. Found a nice grub2 explanation on the wiki but didn't help this situation since probably isn't a grub problem. Probably is a installer failure to map devices properly when it only used what was already available and didn't create them during the install. I don't know, just guessing. Had OpenSuSE 10.3 64bit installed with software raid mirrored swap, boot, root. Used the alternate 64bit Ubuntu iso for installation. Since partitioning was already correctly setup and the raid devices /dev/md0,1,2 were recognized by the installer, I chose to format the partitions with ext3 and accept the configuration:
/dev/md0 = swap = /dev/sda1, /dev/sdb1 = 2Gb
/dev/md1 = boot = /dev/sda2, /dev/sdb2 = 256Mb
/dev/md2 = root = /dev/sda3, /dev/sda3 = 20Gb
Installation process failed at the point of installing grub. It had attempted to install the bootloader on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2. I moved on since it would not let me fiddle with the settings and I got the machine rebooted with the rescue option on the iso used for installing. Now, I can see the root partition is populated with files as expected. dpkg will list that linux-image-generic, headers, and linux-generic are installed with other supporting kernel packages. grub-pc is installed as well. However, the /boot partition or /dev/md1 was empty initially after the reboot. What is the procedure to get grub to install the bootloader on /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2, which represent /dev/md1 or /boot?
Running apt-get update and apt-get upgrade installed a newer kernel and this populated the /boot partition. Running update-grub results in a "/usr/sbin/grub-probe: error: no mapping exists for 'md2'". grub-install /dev/md2 or grub-install /dev/sda2 gives the same error as well. Both commands indicate that "Autodetection of a filesystem module failed, Please specify the module with the option '--modules' explicitly". What is the right modules that need to be loaded for a raid partition in initrd? Should I be telling grub to use the a raid module?
im trying to install wine1.3 and i need to upgrade libc6-i386 so i let apt-get try to do it, but it hangs at unpacking the deb, normally it has no problem no error occurs just sits there like its a huge deb but its only 3mbs. ive tryed using synaptic and doing the following.
sudo rm /var/lib/dpkg/lock
sudo dpkg --configure -a
sudo rm /var/cache/apt/archives/lock
sudo apt-get check
sudo apt-get clean
[Code]..
I have a Gigabyte 6A-M61P-S3 with an nVidia chipset, and I'm using the built-in graphics rather than a discrete graphics card. Ubuntu 10.10 and previous releases ran flawlessly on it using the nouveau drivers. I tried doing an upgrade to 11.04 using the Alternate AMD-64 CD, and it seemed to complete successfully, but when it came time to reboot, I had no video output at all after the BIOS screen. This is a test machine, so I went ahead and did a clean install using encrypted LVM with the Alternate AMD-64 CD after confirming that 64-bit 11.04 ran fine using the Live CD.
The installation went fine, but the first reboot flashed a brief "error: no video mode activated" and then I lost all video output. Subsequent reboots didn't give me any error message, but I had no video output. I suspect there are some boot parameters that would have gotten the nouveau driver working, but I wanted to try Unity, so I rebooted to get the Grub menu, chose Recover Mode, selected failsafe graphics, and got to the Desktop, then installed the proprietary nVidia driver (current) and once I rebooted everything was golden.
is there any way to do a 11.04 Alternate Command Line Install without Internet Connection? I try to install Ubuntu on a Internet-Tablet, wich has no Ethernet-Port and I don't know how to get Wifi to work during Alternate-Install. At previous Ubuntu versions it was possible to let network be unconfigured and install completely from CD or USB-Stick. Isn't this possible in current versions?
View 1 Replies View Relateddownloaded the install dvd mounted it and ran it but I am getting an error line 55 of the kickstart file: section does not end with %%end install exited abnormally.
View 3 Replies View RelatedIm trying to install Ubuntu server for DVD/CD iso.The mdsum is correct: md5sum ubuntu-10.04-server-i386.iso ives 15342636441181f7a19c65984b44e24c ubuntu-10.04-server-i386.isoI have tried it a number of times and the same sequence re-occurs:The first error occur during �Installing the base system�First sign is a red screen displaying a �Debootstrap warning� After a few re-tries the system defaults back to the Installer menu:I then select to post the debugger logs to a web server that starts:the first sign of problems in syslog are:
Aug 17 09:35:35 net/hw-detect.hotplug: Detected hotpluggable network interface lo
Aug 17 09:35:37 hw-detect: Loading PCMCIA bridge driver module: i82365
Aug 17 09:35:37 kernel: [ 268.912151] Intel ISA PCIC probe: not found.
[code]....
root@amudo-linux:/home/amudo/avg85flx-r863-a3205.i386# ls
bin ChangeLog conf data doc init.d install.sh lib README script
root@amudo-linux:/home/amudo/avg85flx-r863-a3205.i386# ./install.sh
There is running avgd deamon. Stop it first, please.
Installation aborted
root@amudo-linux:/home/amudo/avg85flx-r863-a3205.i386#
I want to install AVG8.5. but I do not understand to stop avgd daemon. What should I do?
I use Ubuntu 10.10
Trying to install a newly downloaded DVD image of 11.04 this morning on my T410 LT (4 core/4GB). The image MD5'd okay, burnt it, stuck it in the drive, rebooted, asked me about install lang = english, select install ubuntu, get subject error and it falls into initramfs prompt.So, I put my 10.04 install CD in and guess what, it works!
I will repeat what I have already posted in the another forum, and I understand install is a difficult part of the system, but there is always some glitch or another just trying to start install with ubuntu. Once it runs, if it run, I normally see few other problems after that.
I'm trying to up2date an RHEL4 ES (i386/i686, 32-bit) system. It always fails with:
Quote:
The thing is, when I look in the package lists, that precise version of nagios (nagios-0-2.12-9.el4.i386.hdr) is out-of-date. The version actually in the repositories (I checked several mirrors) is nagios-0-2.12-10.el4.i386.hdr.
I tried clearing the up2date/yum caches - they just rebuilt and came back to the same error.
What can I check to see what may be outdated, or otherwise reconcile this mismatch in some dependency as compared to the actual package version available?
This is preventing me from up2date'ing any package at all on the server, even those with no relation whatsoever to nagios.
Installing f10 on an x86_64 platform from CD or netinst. I can't seem to find a way to have it install i386 compatible (32-bit) software at the same time. Is there a repo that has to be enabled? In f8 i think it was just a box to click somewhere.
View 13 Replies View RelatedI would like to try out fc10 on an old, k6-2 pc. Last night I tried to download the dvd, but firefox 'completed' the download with only 1.2/~3xg, and of course it didn't work.
I am trying a test net installation in VirtualBox, so far so good.
However, I would rather have a more complete installation on hand and I'm looking at the full install cd's --there are 6 of them.
[url]
Are all 6 required for a minimal install, or could I get by with one (or two, etc)? For example, with debian installation cds you can use just the first one -- the rest are just a complete set of packages for everything +kitchen sink.
I have VISTA home installed in my HP DV5 laptop and I have installed MS Virtual PC. When I try to install Fedora 11 i386 get stop at "SMP alternatives: switching to UP code" and won't proceed.But I installed Fedora 11 i386 in my desktop using same steps it work fine.
View 2 Replies View Relatedwhen i try to boot the 11.04 64-bit alternate.iso i get the following message, after it says that isolinux blabla is loaded: EDD: Error 8000 reading sector 2855 and when i remove the cd it says: gfx.c32: not a COM32R imageand then there is a grub-shell.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI am having problems installing Debian 7.7 i386 on the newest HP DL380 GEN9 server with P440ar storage array. The disk detection during installation fails to detect the array.
I have pinpointed the problem to hpsa.ko driver to be outdated as I need a minimum version from September 2014. I have already tried following the guide on " [URL]" but the driver compiling from sources fails (guide is from 2012).
Here is where I got the latest sources: [URL]....
Is there any possible way to install this debian version with this storage array? Newer kernel version is really not an option for me.
"3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.65-1+deb7u2 i686 GNU/Linux"
I am trying to upgrade RH9 to F10. I have downloaded dvd iso image i386. The SHA1 integrity check passes. The installer fails media check due to "errors". I did an independent verification of the DVD and zero errors found. Download was from Fedora's own torrent, so files should be verified anyway. If I bypass the media check I get the message : Running anaconda 11.4.1.62 the Fedora system installer - please wait.....
[Code]....
Long story short - I'm looking to run a live CD so I can alter my existing 10.10 x64 installation. The standard desktop install CD results in a graphically corrupted window (a grainy grey field). The alternate install CD does get me to its text menu, but the shell I open operates on the ramdisk the install CD creates, not the existing hard drives. I can't seem to get the alternate install CD to do anything to my existing file system.
I'm using the x64 alternate install CD off a USB key. Short story long - I'm trying to convert from ext3 which I've inherited from upgrading all the way from Warty, to ext4. I see instructions on how to do it and the best way is using a live CD, so I need to see the existing file system from the live CD via a shell.
As my 10.10 install is working just fine, I'm getting less and less inclined to mess with it at this point, so I may just abandon it. But I understand ext4 is much faster than ext3, plus I always learn a lot when I go through things like this, so this is just a question before I give up.
im trying to install ubuntu 9.10 desktop i386 version, but i simply cant do it! I have tried for hours now. I boot my computer, the cd-room boots, i choose language from the list and press install ubuntu, after that i see the ubuntu logo blinking and in few minutes it gets black and shows "Input Not Supported" and its just bumping around the screen! I had a feeling that maybe my monitor (ASUS) does not support ubuntu so i tried with a very old syncmaster monitor, but similar message appeared! What could be the problem?
View 1 Replies View RelatedI was thinking of creating an extremely minimal version of Xubuntu using XFCE. I have a Dell Mini 9, a netbook that uses a wireless-g card requiring bcmwl-kernel-source to work.What I would like to do is use either the alternate CD or mini.iso minimal install file to perform a command line install-style installation of the system.So far, what I am thinking (from reading this [url].... article:
HTML Code:
http:[url].....is to start off with these packages to begin with:
xorg
slim (if possible with 9.10, unsure if it is still available. in short, i want to use a lightweight display manager)
xfce4
xfce4-goodies
xubuntu-default-settings
bcmwl-kernel-source
aptitude
My opening questions are: Should I go with mini.iso or the Xubuntu Alternate Install CD (or the Ubuntu one)? If so, which one? What additional packages will I need to make the hardware accessible and fully functional? All I can think of so far would be sound (I'd like to stay away from PulseAudio if possible, it wreaks havoc with my computer), my webcam, and the memory card slot, if additional packages are needed for it?What other "core" packages should I include in this list? Should I include Synaptic, or other packages, and why?What do I need to take into consideration, since this is both a directly- and battery-powered computer?
HTML Code:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1155961
post regarding a "Ubuntu-Desktop-Minimal"-type system.
I was following a simple tutorial on how to program and compile a hello world program using assembly when I got this error;Quote:ld: i386 architecture of input file `hello.o' is incompatible with i386:x86-64 output.The tutorial told me to make two files;Quote:hello.asmsection .data;section declaration
msg db "Hello, world!",0xa;our dear string
len equ $ - msg ;length of our dear string
section .text;section declaration
[code]....
I'm trying to install Fedora 12 i386 using CD#1 for a minimal install. For that during installation I selected only Base. For some reason when I started installation it was trying to install 432 packages (Base has got about 80 or so packages). i can understand there might be some dependencies, but really that much? I kept going with the installation of 432 packages, but it finally failed on gtk2-immodule-xim-2.18.3-19.fc12.i686.rpm.I need just minimal install, so I can install LXDE later on by myself.
View 11 Replies View Related