Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:17:59 -0500 Bob Jonkman via talkwrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Howard wrote: > > I have now updated my website install notes. I state in them that > the documentation sucks, and that all the default values work fine. I > did not fill in the repository window. > > Pretty good notes, Howard! > > http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson/Lenovo/ > > - --Bob. Bob, Thanks. -- Howard Gibson hgib...@eol.ca jhowardgib...@gmail.com http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Howard wrote: > I have now updated my website install notes. I state in them that the documentation sucks, and that all the default values work fine. I did not fill in the repository window. Pretty good notes, Howard! http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson/Lenovo/ - --Bob. On 2018-02-12 06:59 PM, Howard Gibson via talk wrote: > On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:15:57 + Giles Orr via talk >wrote: >> >> >> I'm reading all of this with some interest: I tried a Fedora Net >> Install about four months back. And I appear to be the only >> person on this list who had a problem with it. Specifically, I >> got to the page where you have to fill in details about your >> system and users (I think, I'm doing this from memory) and >> couldn't proceed further despite having filled in the details >> because the installer was having a hard time either getting the >> list of mirrors or finding a responsive mirror (I think it was >> the former). The result was a ten minute delay, despite my >> having a fully functional network connection. A bit of research >> at the time seemed to indicate that this was an uncommon but not >> unheard-of problem with the Net Installer. It left me strongly >> inclined to make the big ISO download ... >> >> -- Giles https://www.gilesorr.com/ giles...@gmail.com > > Giles, > > I have now updated my website install notes. I state in them that > the documentation sucks, and that all the default values work fine. > I did not fill in the repository window. > - -- Bob Jonkman Phone: +1-519-635-9413 SOBAC Microcomputer Services http://sobac.com/sobac/ Software --- Office & Business Automation --- Consulting GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Ensure confidentiality, authenticity, non-repudiability iEYEARECAAYFAlqEfVUACgkQuRKJsNLM5epaSwCg4IwVc1l+O4ar0x1skUrv3Cef Ul4AnjyP0SsQgbkHfHxLKjwSimT78Nxq =3nE3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 15:44:24 -0500 Bob Jonkman via talkwrote: > > Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or mail > server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that an > attractive alternate use. Bob, This machine works fine for the stuff I do with it. It would be nice to have Chrome, to play Netflix, but I don't travel much. I have the means of accessing Netflix at home. -- Howard Gibson hgib...@eol.ca jhowardgib...@gmail.com http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 10:49:08 -0500 (EST) "D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk"wrote: > | From: Howard Gibson via talk > > |I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The install DVD > |is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a Netinstall. > > Interesting. What laptop is it? I would think that most 32-bit only > laptops are not really useful any longer. > --- > Talk Mailing List > talk@gtalug.org > https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk Hugh, Lenovo T400. It is my away-from-home machine, and still seems fast enough. -- Howard Gibson hgib...@eol.ca jhowardgib...@gmail.com http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:15:57 + Giles Orr via talkwrote: > > > I'm reading all of this with some interest: I tried a Fedora Net Install > about four months back. And I appear to be the only person on this list > who had a problem with it. Specifically, I got to the page where you have > to fill in details about your system and users (I think, I'm doing this > from memory) and couldn't proceed further despite having filled in the > details because the installer was having a hard time either getting the > list of mirrors or finding a responsive mirror (I think it was the > former). The result was a ten minute delay, despite my having a fully > functional network connection. A bit of research at the time seemed to > indicate that this was an uncommon but not unheard-of problem with the Net > Installer. It left me strongly inclined to make the big ISO download ... > > -- > Giles > https://www.gilesorr.com/ > giles...@gmail.com Giles, I have now updated my website install notes. I state in them that the documentation sucks, and that all the default values work fine. I did not fill in the repository window. -- Howard Gibson hgib...@eol.ca jhowardgib...@gmail.com http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On 2018-02-11 12:08 AM, Bob Jonkman via talk wrote: > > I'm already using IceCat, so the browser isn't my problem. IceCat uses the old Firefox (< 57) codebase, while Firefox 58 is available on 32-bit linux. The new code is much more memory and CPU-efficient. Stewart --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hugh wrote: > What's the processor? I'll have to check. It's possible the two P200s have different CPUs, since there are other differences. And I may be remembering the speed of the dead 64-bit laptop, not the 32-bit laptop. > | But now that some packages are no longer | available in 32-bit > architecture (hello, Chrome!) it may be necessary | to buy a new > laptop. > > Switch to Firefox? What other programs are missing? I'm already using IceCat, so the browser isn't my problem. But the lack of 32-bit Chrome is the thin edge of the wedge. There will be other packages that will no longer be distributed for 32-bit architecture. Then what? But I guess we're not using 8-bit and 16-bit CPUs any more either. > If you've got the notebook, why not use it until it dies Yup. That's how I treat all my computers. And then take the useful parts and frankenstein them into other computers. - --Bob. On 2018-02-10 09:46 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote: > | From: Bob Jonkman via talk> > | I have a Toshiba Satellite P200 laptop, 3 GHz dual-core CPU, 2 > GBytes | RAM, 200 GByte HD, 4 USB ports, and, most wonderful of > all, a 1440x900 | px 17" screen. > > What's the processor? I read a review of a P200 that had a Core > Duo T2350 processor running at 1.867GHz. The fastest Core Duo T > series runs at 2.33GHz. > > | But now that some packages are no longer | available in 32-bit > architecture (hello, Chrome!) it may be necessary | to buy a new > laptop. > > Switch to Firefox? What other programs are missing? > > | Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or > mail | server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that > an | attractive alternate use. > > Power consumption isn't that low on your notebook. There have > been some efficiency advances since 2006 when the Core Duo T series > were introduced. > > I'm typing this on a three year old netbook with a processor that > is roughly as powerful (but with modern features) and takes a lot > less power (7.5W vs 31W + GPU power). > > But that's a minor point. If you've got the notebook, why not use > it until it dies or something better comes along? = > Hugh wrote:>> I would think that most 32-bit only laptops are not > really useful >> any longer. > > I have a Toshiba Satellite P200 laptop, 3 GHz dual-core CPU, 2 > GBytes RAM, 200 GByte HD, 4 USB ports, and, most wonderful of all, > a 1440x900 px 17" screen. > > I was disappointed to learn about a week ago when installing > Debian Testing that it only has a 32-bit CPU. I have another P200 > that no longer boots, and I was sure it had a 64-bit CPU. That one > also had Bluetooth and 6 USB ports, so it was likely a higher > sub-model of the P200. > > Such a machine is perfectly adequate for web surfing, e-mail > reading, maintaining other people's websites, and ssh-ing into > whatever remote machine I'm SysAdminning. But now that some > packages are no longer available in 32-bit architecture (hello, > Chrome!) it may be necessary to buy a new laptop. > > Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or > mail server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that an > attractive alternate use. > > > Howard wrote: >> Has anyone else out there played with this? (Netinstall) > > Yes, very successfully. I generally prefer doing the netinstall. > Using an .iso to install takes time to copy all the OS files and > packages to the computer, and, unless the .iso is a very recent > release, almost everything you just installed has to be replaced > with the first upgrade you make. So, might as well do the > netinstall and get all the current stuff the first time. > > > --Bob. > > > On 2018-02-10 10:49 AM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote: | From: > Howard Gibson via talk >> >> |I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The >> install DVD |is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do >> a Netinstall. >> >> Interesting. What laptop is it? I would think that most 32-bit >> only laptops are not really useful any longer. > >> On 2018-02-09 10:27 PM, Howard Gibson via talk wrote: >>> I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The >>> install DVD is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a >>> Netinstall. Netinstall is poorly documented, but the default >>> settings all work, I was able to select the software I wanted, >>> and it has all worked very well. I think I actually prefer >>> Netinstall to the DVD. >>> >>> Has anyone else out there played with this? >>> >>> I have not yet updated my website notes. - -- Bob Jonkman Phone: +1-519-635-9413 SOBAC Microcomputer Services http://sobac.com/sobac/ Software --- Office & Business Automation --- Consulting GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment:
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
| From: Bob Jonkman via talk| I have a Toshiba Satellite P200 laptop, 3 GHz dual-core CPU, 2 GBytes | RAM, 200 GByte HD, 4 USB ports, and, most wonderful of all, a 1440x900 | px 17" screen. What's the processor? I read a review of a P200 that had a Core Duo T2350 processor running at 1.867GHz. The fastest Core Duo T series runs at 2.33GHz. | But now that some packages are no longer | available in 32-bit architecture (hello, Chrome!) it may be necessary | to buy a new laptop. Switch to Firefox? What other programs are missing? | Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or mail | server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that an | attractive alternate use. Power consumption isn't that low on your notebook. There have been some efficiency advances since 2006 when the Core Duo T series were introduced. I'm typing this on a three year old netbook with a processor that is roughly as powerful (but with modern features) and takes a lot less power (7.5W vs 31W + GPU power). But that's a minor point. If you've got the notebook, why not use it until it dies or something better comes along? --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On 10 February 2018 at 20:44, Bob Jonkman via talkwrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hugh wrote: > > I would think that most 32-bit only laptops are not really useful > > any longer. > > I have a Toshiba Satellite P200 laptop, 3 GHz dual-core CPU, 2 GBytes > RAM, 200 GByte HD, 4 USB ports, and, most wonderful of all, a 1440x900 > px 17" screen. > > I was disappointed to learn about a week ago when installing Debian > Testing that it only has a 32-bit CPU. I have another P200 that no > longer boots, and I was sure it had a 64-bit CPU. That one also had > Bluetooth and 6 USB ports, so it was likely a higher sub-model of the > P200. > > Such a machine is perfectly adequate for web surfing, e-mail reading, > maintaining other people's websites, and ssh-ing into whatever remote > machine I'm SysAdminning. But now that some packages are no longer > available in 32-bit architecture (hello, Chrome!) it may be necessary > to buy a new laptop. > > Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or mail > server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that an > attractive alternate use. > > > Howard wrote: > >> Has anyone else out there played with this? (Netinstall) > > Yes, very successfully. I generally prefer doing the netinstall. Using > an .iso to install takes time to copy all the OS files and packages to > the computer, and, unless the .iso is a very recent release, almost > everything you just installed has to be replaced with the first > upgrade you make. So, might as well do the netinstall and get all the > current stuff the first time. > > > - --Bob. > > > On 2018-02-10 10:49 AM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote: > > | From: Howard Gibson via talk > > > > |I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The > > install DVD |is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a > > Netinstall. > > > > Interesting. What laptop is it? I would think that most 32-bit > > only laptops are not really useful any longer. > > > On 2018-02-09 10:27 PM, Howard Gibson via talk wrote: > >> I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The install > >> DVD is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a Netinstall. > >> Netinstall is poorly documented, but the default settings all > >> work, I was able to select the software I wanted, and it has all > >> worked very well. I think I actually prefer Netinstall to the > >> DVD. > >> > >> Has anyone else out there played with this? > >> > >> I have not yet updated my website notes. I'm reading all of this with some interest: I tried a Fedora Net Install about four months back. And I appear to be the only person on this list who had a problem with it. Specifically, I got to the page where you have to fill in details about your system and users (I think, I'm doing this from memory) and couldn't proceed further despite having filled in the details because the installer was having a hard time either getting the list of mirrors or finding a responsive mirror (I think it was the former). The result was a ten minute delay, despite my having a fully functional network connection. A bit of research at the time seemed to indicate that this was an uncommon but not unheard-of problem with the Net Installer. It left me strongly inclined to make the big ISO download ... -- Giles https://www.gilesorr.com/ giles...@gmail.com --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hugh wrote: > I would think that most 32-bit only laptops are not really useful > any longer. I have a Toshiba Satellite P200 laptop, 3 GHz dual-core CPU, 2 GBytes RAM, 200 GByte HD, 4 USB ports, and, most wonderful of all, a 1440x900 px 17" screen. I was disappointed to learn about a week ago when installing Debian Testing that it only has a 32-bit CPU. I have another P200 that no longer boots, and I was sure it had a 64-bit CPU. That one also had Bluetooth and 6 USB ports, so it was likely a higher sub-model of the P200. Such a machine is perfectly adequate for web surfing, e-mail reading, maintaining other people's websites, and ssh-ing into whatever remote machine I'm SysAdminning. But now that some packages are no longer available in 32-bit architecture (hello, Chrome!) it may be necessary to buy a new laptop. Are there any down sides to using a 32-bit machine as a web- or mail server? I'm thinking low power consumption, make that an attractive alternate use. Howard wrote: >> Has anyone else out there played with this? (Netinstall) Yes, very successfully. I generally prefer doing the netinstall. Using an .iso to install takes time to copy all the OS files and packages to the computer, and, unless the .iso is a very recent release, almost everything you just installed has to be replaced with the first upgrade you make. So, might as well do the netinstall and get all the current stuff the first time. - --Bob. On 2018-02-10 10:49 AM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote: > | From: Howard Gibson via talk> > |I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The > install DVD |is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a > Netinstall. > > Interesting. What laptop is it? I would think that most 32-bit > only laptops are not really useful any longer. > On 2018-02-09 10:27 PM, Howard Gibson via talk wrote: >> I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The install >> DVD is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a Netinstall. >> Netinstall is poorly documented, but the default settings all >> work, I was able to select the software I wanted, and it has all >> worked very well. I think I actually prefer Netinstall to the >> DVD. >> >> Has anyone else out there played with this? >> >> I have not yet updated my website notes. - -- Bob Jonkman Phone: +1-519-635-9413 SOBAC Microcomputer Services http://sobac.com/sobac/ Software --- Office & Business Automation --- Consulting GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Ensure confidentiality, authenticity, non-repudiability iEYEARECAAYFAlp/WaEACgkQuRKJsNLM5eoSNQCgwI6BKg7y6vNCTj6K4iOxHUAW HU8AoIyMEn6cnYMKNOgXe8mf2elrSZKt =nOzg -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Re: [GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
On 02/09/2018 10:27 PM, Howard Gibson via talk wrote: >I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The install DVD is no > longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a Netinstall. Netinstall is poorly > documented, but the default settings all work, I was able to select the > software I wanted, and it has all worked very well. I think I actually > prefer Netinstall to the DVD. > >Has anyone else out there played with this? > >I have not yet updated my website notes. > Yes, but with OpenSUSE, not Fedora. However, I did it because one of my systems only had a CD drive. Worked fine. --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
[GTALUG] Fedora Netinstall
I have just upgraded my 32-bit laptop to Fedora 27. The install DVD is no longer available for 32-bit. I had to do a Netinstall. Netinstall is poorly documented, but the default settings all work, I was able to select the software I wanted, and it has all worked very well. I think I actually prefer Netinstall to the DVD. Has anyone else out there played with this? I have not yet updated my website notes. -- Howard Gibson hgib...@eol.ca jhowardgib...@gmail.com http://home.eol.ca/~hgibson --- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk