Re: [PLUG] Firefox 52 crashes on older 32 bit distro
General view that fewer releases == fewer failures is generally not true, especially in today's data driven age. That is why Mozilla improves/fixes/releases Firefox often. In general, Firefox quality has improved for most users since they started rapid releases. They can support it by real data. I understand that thing might not always work for your exotic setup. You might have to, eventually, file bugs and submit patches to Mozilla to keep it working for you. I would definitely encourage to see yearly State of DevOps compiled by Puppet for data on that more frequent software product and service releases and enabling automation increases quality and reliability. Findings from the 2015 State of DevOps Report: * High-performing IT organizations experience 60X fewer failures and recover from failure 168X faster than their lower-performing peers. They also deploy 30X more frequently with 200X shorter lead times. * Lean management and continuous delivery practices create the conditions for delivering value faster, sustainably. * High performance is achievable no matter if your apps are greenfield, brownfield or legacy. * DevOps initiatives launched solely by C-level executives or from the grassroots are less likely to succeed. * IT managers play a critical role in promoting diversity and limiting burnout. There is more about this in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DevOps It goes beyond upstarts like Puppet, here is IBM (source of your beloved T60's) https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/se-devops/part1/ It is worth considering. -Tomas On Sat, 2017-05-13 at 17:28 -0700, Keith Lofstrom wrote: > On some of my machines, I run 32 bit Scientific Linux > 6.9, a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.9. RHEL6.x > is supported until November 2020, perhaps to 2023 if Red > Hat repeats past practices, and SL (supported by a team > at Fermilabs, with extra scientific packages added), is > an enhanced clone of RHEL. > > However Firefox 52.1esr, the supposedly stable extended > release, SEGMENTATION FAULTS with the 32 bit version. > Safe mode ditto. No trace files left after the segfault. > > Could be worse; On one of my laptops (hacked hardware), > Firefox sometimes crashes Linux, causing a reboot. > My favorite programming language is solder, but that > doesn't leave trace files, either. > > So, I downrevved Firefox to 45.9esr, turned off automatic > updates, and will put up with the nagging messages from > websites demanding the latest and greatest. Better than > crashes. Maybe the next ESR release won't segfault, and > I can turn updates back on. > > I'm told that version 52 is a MAJOR re-redesign of Firefox, > an all-singing all-dancing multithreaded media munching > monster. Not competely tested, apparently. Perhaps > Mozilla should work on their testing processes first. > > BTW, the good thing is that Firefox stores itself > entirely in /usr/lib/firefox, so changing versions is > as easy as moving them into directories with names like > /usr/lib/firefox45, then simlinking /usr/lib/firefox to > that. When the next version XXesr comes along, I will > remove the symlink, install to /usr/lib/firefox, rename > that to /usr/lib/firefoxXX, then symlink to that. A > small hassle, but better than crashes. > > -- > > While I am slowly upgrading the machines to SL7.3 64 bit, > I have a 20 year accumulation of more than 1000 binaries > to recompile and verify, so this will take a while. > > I run long term support distros so I don't have to do this > often, but our friends at Mozilla seem to prefer churn. > Perhaps they should get a job at Microsoft, churning Word. > > I prefer the fewer failures, fewer features corner of the > map. I can generate plenty of my own failures, thank you. > > Keith > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Windows 2000 graphics poor VirtualBox...
On 05/09/2017 06:58 PM, Michael Christopher Robinson wrote: > I first attempted to run XID Authoring Database in WINE, > that resulted in cut off text and no rendering of JPG files. > So I switch on my Fedora 25 system to VirtualBox running > Windows 2000, but the graphics are poor. Has anyone gotten the > graphics to be better in VirtualBox or has anyone gotten XID > 7.0 to work in Wine? The problem with VirtualBox is that the > mpg files are on Linux and there are a lot of them on an > EXT3/4 formatted file system. Had WINE worked, that may not > have posed a problem. It is easy to map (share) a linux folder to a windows folder in Virtualbox. When you do that, Win2000 sees the shared data as ntfs/fat32 etc and not whatever the native linux format is. Refer to VB documentation. Wine is another beast. I've run it for years and often sift the console output to see what glitches need fixing. Sometimes it's a simple ddl override or registry setting, sometimes an exercise in futility. alternatively, you can try qemu http://www.qemu.org/ It's a bit harder to use, being completely command line based, but I find it superior to VB. Its been a while since I fired up Win2k, but I do not remember any graphical issues. > > The graphics in Virtualbox are grainy. The video card is an > NVIDIA GT210, the video is on a 65" Samsung HDTV. > > The same JPG files under gnome 3 show up fine in file manager, > but they are grainy in VirtualBox. > Did you install the Windows 2000 guest additions? There are several video card choices as well. You can try another if the default does not work. Also, increase the video card memory settings in VB. The default is pretty skimpy. > Does anyone know of a Linux compatible open source clone of > XID 7.0? I'm starting to think the only reasonable solution > is to make one. Did the company go under? The source code > would be nice. > > XID for those who don't know is a Windows 98 and later database > program. It apparently works on Windows 10, but the print > function is broken. The install procedure for it is kludgy, you > are supposed to copy it to the Documents folder executable and > all on Windows. > All linux distros come with a bunch of relational databases. If you mean this XID: http://www.exetersoftware.com/cat/XID/xid.html Then you should look at: FreeDelta: http://freedelta.sourceforge.net/ Opendelta: https://github.com/atlasoflivingaustralia/open-delta Maybe something here: http://priede.bf.lu.lv/ftp/pub/Programmeeshana/DatuBaazes/-noteiceeji/saraksts.htm > This Fedora based media computer has been superceded by PLEX, but > the freenas server is shutting down now. I think one of the 4 > terabyte drives is failing and probably the one with the movies > on it. With the freenas server shutting down on me, I'm running > 9.10 U3, it is hard to know what is lost and what is still there. > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
[PLUG] Firefox 52 crashes on older 32 bit distro
On some of my machines, I run 32 bit Scientific Linux 6.9, a clone of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.9. RHEL6.x is supported until November 2020, perhaps to 2023 if Red Hat repeats past practices, and SL (supported by a team at Fermilabs, with extra scientific packages added), is an enhanced clone of RHEL. However Firefox 52.1esr, the supposedly stable extended release, SEGMENTATION FAULTS with the 32 bit version. Safe mode ditto. No trace files left after the segfault. Could be worse; On one of my laptops (hacked hardware), Firefox sometimes crashes Linux, causing a reboot. My favorite programming language is solder, but that doesn't leave trace files, either. So, I downrevved Firefox to 45.9esr, turned off automatic updates, and will put up with the nagging messages from websites demanding the latest and greatest. Better than crashes. Maybe the next ESR release won't segfault, and I can turn updates back on. I'm told that version 52 is a MAJOR re-redesign of Firefox, an all-singing all-dancing multithreaded media munching monster. Not competely tested, apparently. Perhaps Mozilla should work on their testing processes first. BTW, the good thing is that Firefox stores itself entirely in /usr/lib/firefox, so changing versions is as easy as moving them into directories with names like /usr/lib/firefox45, then simlinking /usr/lib/firefox to that. When the next version XXesr comes along, I will remove the symlink, install to /usr/lib/firefox, rename that to /usr/lib/firefoxXX, then symlink to that. A small hassle, but better than crashes. -- While I am slowly upgrading the machines to SL7.3 64 bit, I have a 20 year accumulation of more than 1000 binaries to recompile and verify, so this will take a while. I run long term support distros so I don't have to do this often, but our friends at Mozilla seem to prefer churn. Perhaps they should get a job at Microsoft, churning Word. I prefer the fewer failures, fewer features corner of the map. I can generate plenty of my own failures, thank you. Keith -- Keith Lofstrom kei...@keithl.com ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
Re: [PLUG] Ubuntu upgrade
instead of comparing xorg files, I'd want to get it to try to automagically configure stuff fresh, maybe with a *sudo dpkg-reconfigure xorg* and a *sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade && sudo apt dist-upgrade* Maybe try dpkg-reconfiguring your window manager (unity?) -- did it disable the universe or multiverse for the upgrade and do you need to reenable it? Check your /etc/apt/sources.list and /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ Did you do the upgrade to 16.04 by manually editing the sources, or did you use the tool in the Software Center, or did you do-release-upgrade from the command line? On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Michael Barnes wrote: > Yeah, I got to thinking after I started I shouldn't have done that. > Everything has been packed away for almost a year. It seems I've forgotten > more than I remember. A new hard drive is probably in order. I'll have to > compare Xorg files and look at drivers loaded between the two versions. > Just have to remember how to do all that. > > Michael > > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Edward Koenig > wrote: > > > Michael > > If the new version boots and you can ssh to log in, then most likely > > either X.org or a GPU driver did not update fully or correctly. This is > > very typical for proprietary nvidia drivers, or any proprietary hardware > > drivers that install a kernel module. You might try using the command > line > > tools to reinstall the GPU and X bits. I'm not sure it Ubuntu switched > to > > wayland with this release so perhaps check on that. Remember to read the > > release notes etc before clicking "upgrade" > > > > Nuking from orbit, as Dick suggests after backup, will certainly work. > > Personally run a Linux distribution to avoid such "windowesque" fixes. > > > > Ed > > > > > > > On May 12, 2017, at 11:36 AM, Dick Steffens > > wrote: > > > > > >> On 05/12/2017 11:24 AM, Michael Barnes wrote: > > >> I rebooted again and at the grub screen chose 14.04LTS. Everything > came > > up > > >> normally. After login, I get a pop-up window that says 14.04 is out > > dated > > >> and no longer supported. Anyhow, display and everything works, so I > > know at > > >> least the hardware is okay. Shutdown and restart, let grub screen > choose > > >> default and back to blank screens. I can ssh in and shutdown from > remote > > >> session. Screens give Ubuntu shutdown splash just before power off. > > > > > > Having been on this list a fairly long time, I've followed the advice > of > > > others who say one should not use the "upgrade" path to move from one > > > Ubuntu release to another, but should start with a fresh install. I > have > > > gone from Ubuntu 10 to 12 to 14, and am slowly moving to 16. Each time > I > > > had the luxury of being able to at least put in a fresh hard drive for > > > the new version, and then mount the old hard drive to be able to copy > > > files as needed. I don't think any of the episodes has been painless, > > > since it seems there's always something big that changes so that it > > > doesn't work the way it did in the previous version, but I have always > > > been able to get past it, often with the help of folks on this list. > > > > > > So, in your case, I'd recommend using Grub to boot to your previous > > > version, find a way to back up all your important files, and install 16 > > > from scratch. Better would be to have two machines, but not everyone > has > > > that luxury. I'm happy that I do have that option this time, because > > > there are a handful of things I have yet to be able to figure out how > to > > > do in 16 that I need on at least a weekly basis, if not a daily one. > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > > > > Dick Steffens > > > > > > ___ > > > PLUG mailing list > > > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > ___ > > PLUG mailing list > > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > > > ___ > PLUG mailing list > PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org > http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug > ___ PLUG mailing list PLUG@lists.pdxlinux.org http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
