[NCLUG] Hard drive only Linux install.
Haefner,Kyle Anson
Kyle.Haefner at ColoState.EDU
Mon Dec 18 16:24:30 MST 2006
Hello all,
I was hoping to install xubuntu
on ye' old laptop without cdrom/floppy/usbboot/ethboot. My plan was to installl from the
hard drive. I put the hard drive in a laptop with a cdrom and booted the live cd.
I partitioned the hard drive into three
partitions a "boot" partition to hold grub vmlinuz and initrd, and an "iso" partition to hold the live cd ISO.
I ran grub-install, made a menu.lst and rebooted. The machine booted up and I was presented with the
BusyBox commandline. Wasn't sure how to go from there...
I could mount the ISO partition, and then tried to loop mount the ISO. It didn't work. :(
Does anyone know how to install linux using only the hard drive?
kyle
________________________________________
From: nclug-bounces at nclug.org [nclug-bounces at nclug.org] On Behalf Of nclug-request at nclug.org [nclug-request at nclug.org]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 3:33 PM
To: nclug at nclug.org
Subject: NCLUG Digest, Vol 95, Issue 2
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (David Braley)
2. RE: Little Lunuxes anyone? (Darrin Goodman)
3. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (Mica Fine)
4. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (Mica Fine)
5. Re: Failing drive or controller... (Benson Chow)
6. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (John L. Bass)
7. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (Chad Perrin)
8. Re: Failing drive or controller... (jeff)
9. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (Chad Perrin)
10. Re: Little Lunuxes anyone? (David Braley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 12:07:47 -0700
From: David Braley <davbraley at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <4586E703.9090103 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Mica Fine wrote:
> Which is your favorite for old laptops, and why?
Mica,
I have had good luck with Damn Small Linux on an older laptop with a
classic Pentium 90 mhz with only 32 megs of ram. My laptop does not have
a cdrom drive, so I was able to do a net-install with a carefully
prepared floppy disc. I used an older 16-bit pcmcia ethernet card for
the installation. I even found an older 16-bit wireless card that
plugged into the pcmcia slot for wireless connectivity, and it works! I
need to keep it plugged in because the old battery will not even last
long enough to boot the darn thing.
The default window manager is FluxBox and responds well on the machine.
Firefox does not handle the minimal resources, but the Dillo Web browser
loads fine. The machine is a fully functional, with X. Worth a look.
If your resources are a little higher, I would recommend a minimal
install of Debian with a light weight window manager like FluxBox.
My two cents.
Take care.
David
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 12:08:13 -0700
From: "Darrin Goodman" <Darrin.Goodman at ColoState.edu>
Subject: RE: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: "'Northern Colorado Linux Users Group'" <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <006e01c722d7$ddc47020$abb55281 at ext.colostate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
-----Original Message-----
From: nclug-bounces at nclug.org [mailto:nclug-bounces at nclug.org] On Behalf Of
Mica Fine
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 10:15 AM
To: nclug at nclug.org
Subject: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
Which is your favorite for old laptops, and why?
---- ---- ---- ----
Xubuntu has become my favorite distribution for running on old or new
machines. I like that it comes with only the essentials, and gives the user
the choice of installing additional software. For me, the concept of "less
is more" goes a long way. Xubuntu is easy to configure and allows you a lot
of customization. The XFCE desktop environment is easy to use and is light
weight. The Synaptic Package Handler works great for installing most
anything you might need, and apt-get fills in whatever gaps there might be
otherwise. Disclaimer: I have found that there is a limit on how old of a
machine you would want to install Xubuntu on. One of my P2 machines would
not run X properly while using this OS.
For much older machines, I have had really good luck with Damn Small Linux
(DSL). I currently have it running on a 400 MHZ machine with 64 MB RAM and
a 2 Gig drive. Wireless is a bit more difficult to configure, but Ethernet
works great. DSL comes with all of the basic essentials that you might need
and fits into a nice little 50 MB package. Although it is set up as a
live-CD, it's actually pretty easy to install after you have
formatted/partitioned your hard drive. The latest version is also visually
appealing, and I like the simplicity of the Fluxbox desktop environment
(file under: myOpinion). There are too many icons located on the desktop
for my taste, but that can be easily fixed.
An older P2 ThinkPad that I have was able to run FedoraCore3, but X would
not work after I upgraded to FC4. FC3 worked pretty well back when it was
on there; not sure what this system is running now.
Hope this helps. If you have questions specific to my reply, please feel
free to email me off of the list.
- Darrin
_______________________________________________
NCLUG mailing list NCLUG at nclug.org
To unsubscribe, subscribe, or modify
your settings, go to:
http://www.nclug.org/mailman/listinfo/nclug
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:18:45 -0700
From: "Mica Fine" <micafine at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: "Northern Colorado Linux Users Group" <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID:
<a737a8a50612181218n2a5c0fc8k6ff0f355ba7be5df at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Thank you foryour input David!
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:20:31 -0700
From: "Mica Fine" <micafine at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: "Northern Colorado Linux Users Group" <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID:
<a737a8a50612181220x6409fbf6y3ce5ba45e5e163cb at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Thanks Darrin!
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:33:27 -0700 (MST)
From: Benson Chow <blc at q.dyndns.org>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Failing drive or controller...
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612160032360.2422 at q.dyndns.org>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
It's not enough information from just seeing a sector or so fail to
pinpoint whether it's a dying harddrive or controller. Plus
the fact that recent IDE controllers have some intelligence on-disk that
the drive itself has part of the controller. But usually it is the disk
module that failed though -- if you never had any disk failures before,
here's a good rule of thumb - blame the disks first.
There appears to be two errors in that screen shot - thermal recalibration
failed and timeout while read sector. While something as silly as the
hard drive getting suddenly disconnected could possibly cause both, having
a disk that went badly out of alignment and triggerred the disk's onboard
microcontroller to give up is the more likely scenario.
Either way, regardless if it's the drive or the onboard controller, it's
likely time to have someone visit the sick machine and someone who's
authorized to visit the machine at FRII is the only real answer :-( What's
the colo contract say about dying machines - and do you have someone
locally authorized to visit the machine?
(For this type of situation where I'm far away from my box and must need
high uptime I'd probably have set up the machine with some sort of hot- or
cold- swappable RAID system that can automatically figure out and rebuild
any replaced redundancy... and have someone who does not need to know
anything about the system that could replace disks available...)
-bc
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, jeff wrote:
> s/Linux/Free Software :)
>
> I have an OpenBSD firewall which appears to have a failing drive or IDE
> controller. It is still passing packets fine and has been for days, but I
> can't log in via console (KVM over IP) or ssh.
>
> A gory snapshot:
> http://jebba.blagblagblag.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/ahimsa-fw2-20061215.png
>
> Here's the real kicker: I'm 6,000+ miles away from this box at the moment...
> The box is co-located @ FRII.
>
> Any folks on this list who are reasonably fluent in OpenBSD that can help?
> Poke me on or offlist. :)
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:07:14 -0700
From: "John L. Bass" <jbass at dmsd.com>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: micafine at gmail.com, nclug at nclug.org
Message-ID: <200612182107.kBIL7EH0028355 at dmsd.com>
"Mica Fine" <micafine at gmail.com> writes:
> Which is your favorite for old laptops, and why?
Oddly enough, RedHat 7, 9 and Fedora Core 1 or 2 based systems are
still high on my list. I still have a number of 16MB/32MB RH machines
running as firewalls, plus a notebook.
For small memory (<64M) systems RH9 is still a favorite, as most older
hardware systems are supported. A suprising number of more current software
packages will will source install with little trouble.
2.4 kernel based Fedora is also pretty usable, the later 2.6 kernels
page like hell, and are dead slow on small memory machines.
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:31:01 -0700
From: Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <20061218213101.GC29506 at apotheon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:07:47PM -0700, David Braley wrote:
>
> I have had good luck with Damn Small Linux on an older laptop with a
> classic Pentium 90 mhz with only 32 megs of ram. My laptop does not have
> a cdrom drive, so I was able to do a net-install with a carefully
> prepared floppy disc. I used an older 16-bit pcmcia ethernet card for
> the installation. I even found an older 16-bit wireless card that
> plugged into the pcmcia slot for wireless connectivity, and it works! I
> need to keep it plugged in because the old battery will not even last
> long enough to boot the darn thing.
>
> The default window manager is FluxBox and responds well on the machine.
> Firefox does not handle the minimal resources, but the Dillo Web browser
> loads fine. The machine is a fully functional, with X. Worth a look.
>
> If your resources are a little higher, I would recommend a minimal
> install of Debian with a light weight window manager like FluxBox.
I'm curious:
What are the benefits to using DSL over a minimal Debian install? My
understanding is that DSL is basically equivalent to a minimal Debian
install, except that it adds some lightweight user environment software
and applications rather than making you choose them for yourself. Is
there some benefit other than a quicker "acceleration" from zero to GUI
in the install process?
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"The first rule of magic is simple. Don't waste your time waving your
hands and hopping when a rock or a club will do." - McCloctnick the Lucid
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 18:37:06 -0300
From: jeff <jeff at themoes.org>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Failing drive or controller...
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <45870A02.6010405 at themoes.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Benson Chow wrote:
> It's not enough information from just seeing a sector or so fail to
> pinpoint whether it's a dying harddrive or controller. Plus the fact
> that recent IDE controllers have some intelligence on-disk that the
> drive itself has part of the controller. But usually it is the disk
> module that failed though -- if you never had any disk failures before,
> here's a good rule of thumb - blame the disks first.
>
> There appears to be two errors in that screen shot - thermal
> recalibration failed and timeout while read sector. While something as
> silly as the hard drive getting suddenly disconnected could possibly
> cause both, having a disk that went badly out of alignment and
> triggerred the disk's onboard microcontroller to give up is the more
> likely scenario.
Ok. Thanks for the info. :)
> Either way, regardless if it's the drive or the onboard controller, it's
> likely time to have someone visit the sick machine and someone who's
> authorized to visit the machine at FRII is the only real answer :-(
> What's the colo contract say about dying machines - and do you have
> someone locally authorized to visit the machine?
Yes, I do, but he's much more confident with GNU/Linux than OpenBSD.
> (For this type of situation where I'm far away from my box and must need
> high uptime I'd probably have set up the machine with some sort of hot-
> or cold- swappable RAID system that can automatically figure out and
> rebuild any replaced redundancy... and have someone who does not need to
> know anything about the system that could replace disks available...)
Oh for sure--it's just not all perfect yet. ;) What I really wanted was to set
up CARP...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Address_Redundancy_Protocol
The system is still marching on, which is cool. I just can't log in and change
any rules.
Perhaps this thread can turn into: what's the "best" 1U system for an OpenBSD
firewall? Something that can hold at least 6+ ethernet (presumably 2 onboard +
4 port) 256 megs ram, Gig Mhz or so. I've tried some of the OpenBSD recommended
vendors in the past, but haven't been too wowed. No puffycomputing.com that
I've seen. ;)
Thanks again,
-Jeff
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:38:51 -0700
From: Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <20061218213851.GD29506 at apotheon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 10:15:23AM -0700, Mica Fine wrote:
> Which is your favorite for old laptops, and why?
As David Braley mentioned, a minimal Debian install is a pretty good
choice. DSL may or may not be better -- I don't know quite that much
about it, currently. My last laptop (which has recently suffered
failure of the screen, unfortunately) was a Thinkpad 600E, with a
Pentium 2 processor and 128MB of ram. A minimal Debian install, with
the user environment being built one APT command at a time, gave me a
very high-functioning, lightweight system that served my needs better
than any default install of any distribution was likely to do.
In general, the "build from a minimal install" approach is probably your
best bet no matter what distribution you choose, with the possible
exception of certain distributions whose default installs are
specifically designed to be lightweight (such as DSL). Last I checked,
many distributions with a comprehensive package management system
comparable to APT have a slightly more weighty "minimal" install than
Debian, though the last time I checked was a couple years ago. Even so,
the difference is not great, and you're probably okay going with almost
any major distribution's "minimal" install as long as it supports your
hardware and provides a software management system that makes choosing
and installing applications a trivial operation (APT, YUM, et cetera
come to mind).
For distributions that provide a lightweight default install complete
with all the trimmings, however, I have heard more unqualified good
things about Damn Small Linux than any other, similarly targeted Linux
distribution.
If you want to go the "major distro, minimal install" route, you might
also consider something like FreeBSD. Just a thought.
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"It's just incredible that a trillion-synapse computer could actually
spend Saturday afternoon watching a football game." - Marvin Minsky
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:33:54 -0700
From: David Braley <davbraley at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [NCLUG] Little Lunuxes anyone?
To: Northern Colorado Linux Users Group <nclug at nclug.org>
Message-ID: <45871752.1000600 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Chad Perrin wrote:
> I'm curious:
>
> What are the benefits to using DSL over a minimal Debian install? My
> understanding is that DSL is basically equivalent to a minimal Debian
> install, except that it adds some lightweight user environment software
> and applications rather than making you choose them for yourself. Is
> there some benefit other than a quicker "acceleration" from zero to GUI
> in the install process?
>
Chad,
I did get a minimal install of Debian to install and run on my old
laptop. After installing xfree and FluxBox (to make the comparison), I
found the machine ran a lot slower. I think this has something to do
with a "customized" or "tweaked" form of xfree DSL uses, and the
installation of a lot more stuff. When the install of DSL is finished,
the footprint of "stuff" installed onto the system is about one half
what a default minimum of Debian is without X (even with DSL's xfree and
apps!). But, my main reason for choosing DSL was because even though it
is a small distro, it behaves more like a popular big one.
What I mean by this is: when DSL boots, it sees everything (hardware).
DSL configs my wireless, configs sound, etc, right out of the box. Most
of the newer larger distro's do the same thing. I think the ability of
DSL to behave this way is because it is (I think) based on Knoppix,
which is based on Debian. And in my opinion, Knoppix is one of the most
bad-ass live CD's around because of its hardware detecting ability.
If I am having trouble getting something to work on a Linux machine, and
I want to learn something about how Linux wants to detect the hardware
or how it wants to try and configure something, I boot the darn thing
with a Knoppix live CD and just poke around. Knoppix will almost always
detect things correctly, and I can then use that information in the
distro I am trying to work with. See what newbies like me have to deal with!
Now, after you install DSL, you can enable apt, point the system to a
Debian repository, and with "apt-get update", and "apt-get upgrade", you
can get a full Debian system going. BUT, and I say this with caution,
some things might break, so be careful what you put onto the system (I
think this kind of thing also applies to the Ubuntu users out there).
So, what are the benefits? From the viewpoint of being someone who still
struggles with getting things to work, I find DSL easier to get up and
running. I'm just a big wimp!
That is all.
David
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NCLUG mailing list
NCLUG at nclug.org
http://www.nclug.org/mailman/listinfo/nclug
To unsubscribe, subscribe, or modify
your settings, go to:
http://www.nclug.org/mailman/listinfo/nclug
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than 'Re: Contents of LUG digest...'
End of NCLUG Digest, Vol 95, Issue 2
************************************
More information about the NCLUG
mailing list