The Official "I'm a Linux" Thread

[Klark]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, so it's not as catchy as PC and Mac, but even Linux users will need some help.

This is the thread to ask other users if you're looking for a particular Linux program or are trying to troubleshoot your operating system.

I'm sure that there won't be a large quantity of Linux users, but I myself have used OpenSUSe, Kubuntu, Ubuntu and Debian, so help is out there.

As with the other threads, let's keep it civil.

[Chriz]

Linux does indeed rock.

I'm unsticking these for now. Let's let the forum fill up a bit before we make it all top-heavy with stickies.

[NeonLightChild]

I'll be switching over pretty soon to Kubuntu, so I shall soon be a Linux-nerd. I've already played around on it a bit, with the different programs and whatnot, so I expect an easy switch. And if not, then there's always tech support :p

[Klark]

My only quick word of warning on Kubuntu is that if you bluetooth with your phone, don't expect it to work with Kubuntu. Bluetooth has been broken in Kubuntu for a few releases now. However, there is a work-around using GNOME bluetooth applications.

Also, one of the reasons I recently switched to OpenSUSe 11.1 is that the newest release of Kubuntu using KDE 4.2.2 had a tendency to lock up and shut down my screen on my system, which is a Dimension E310. This is possibly because of a problem with the Nvidia graphics card I was using. OpenSUSe wouldn't load on the screen with that graphics card, and once I switched back to the motherboard-installed graphics port, OpenSUSe was fine, but I never did try Kubuntu on that system again.

Hope some of that gets you somewhat prepared. Other than the bluetooth, I loved Kubuntu. While I find GNOME to be more functionally sound, I enjoy the eye-pleasing KDE environment too. I typically install KDE versions of Linux and use GNOME programs when I need to.

[NeonLightChild]

No bluetooth here, so no worries. And apparently the version of Kubuntu I have (don't rememeber which one, of course) has issues with wireless, so I'll be playing around with that.

[Klark]

I believe the latest release, 9.04, caused me to revert to using a wire because it has issues. The previous verson, 8.10, I think, didn't have that problem and easily found my wireless card.

[daemon ulf]

my issue of ubuntu I could not get the wireless to work

[Klark]

What version was it?

In nearly any distro of Ubuntu, you have to install Wine and then find the windows driver to your wireless card and install it with Windows Wireless Drivers.

By running lsusb, you can then see if your wireless card (if it's connected by USB) is visible. From there, you probe the mod and edit your preferences to make sure it starts automatically.

I'm really hoping that wireless and bluetooth gets easier for Linux in the future. I'm sure it will, the developers are hard working individuals.

[daemon ulf]

What version was it?

In nearly any distro of Ubuntu, you have to install Wine and then find the windows driver to your wireless card and install it with Windows Wireless Drivers.

By running lsusb, you can then see if your wireless card (if it's connected by USB) is visible. From there, you probe the mod and edit your preferences to make sure it starts automatically.

I'm really hoping that wireless and bluetooth gets easier for Linux in the future. I'm sure it will, the developers are hard working individuals.

I'm not sure of the release number but I remember it was called Gutsy Gibbon, and I tried that, many, many times following the various advic of my peers, but to no avail, so I just hooked my router to the comp. and had a wired connection.

[Klark]

Ah, yes, Gutsy Gibbon was version 7.10. Well, like I said before, in 8.10, wireless worked after probing the mod, but in 9.04 it appears broken again. I suppose Ubuntu is doomed for right now to have an on-again off-again relationship with wireless. :shrug:

[Hoplite]

i'm still a novice at linux...i started the RHCE certification coursen about a month ago...so far, i kinda like linux...but sometimes i get a why-does-it-have-to-be-so-complicated feeling :D

[NeonLightChild]

Here's a puzzler, and my tech support agrees and will be looking into it, but see what you can make of it:

I have the GNOME version of Ubuntu, running it on my laptop. The first time I start the computer and it lands on the sign-in page, I can't move the mouse pointer or type; it's locked up. I turn the thing off and back on again, and now I can move the mouse and type. I want to say this was the case with Kubuntu too, but I only logged into that once so I don't know if that was an issue.

I'll boot to Windows on the same computer and have no issues, since there is no password for that, so it just goes straight to the Welcome page.

[Klark]

So are you using the GNOME version of Kubuntu then? If so, and it continues to be a problem, you may want to download just the regular installment of Ubuntu. If that's not the case, then personally I don't know. I've never run into that before.

Did you install via LiveCD? Was it one downloaded from the net? If so, did the md5 checksum come up alright. Just the tiniest error in downloading can cause some wild things to happen with a Linux installment.

[NeonLightChild]

It was installed through LiveCD, so no downloading issues to worry about. Either way, I'll have someone check on the things you mentioned (I just use the system, anything technical needs to be done by other people) just ot be sure. I like the GNOME a lot, and I'm told that turning the computer off and on like that isn't really damaging to the system.

[Klark]

Its not. I've had to do that myself. Well, I should say it's not damaging the file system of the OS. Linux doesn't load too many files at startup.

[NeonLightChild]

Found out what was going on (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/366527). There's something weird with Ubuntu and the laptop I have, and apparently a lot of people had trouble with it too, so it just needs a fix somewhere and then it'll work. Must be a Dell thing, even though I don't really have the original OS on it anymore.

[Klark]

Found out what was going on (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/366527). There's something weird with Ubuntu and the laptop I have, and apparently a lot of people had trouble with it too, so it just needs a fix somewhere and then it'll work. Must be a Dell thing, even though I don't really have the original OS on it anymore.

I'm glad you got it worked out. It's important to report bugs like that so they can resolve the issue in later distros.

[Hoplite]

As I mentioned earlier, i use 2 SATA disks. I gave grub installed in the MBR of sda. I have Windows XP in sda (250G) and Red Hat in sdb(160G). I had to reinstall Windows today, when some problems occured:



1. After rebooting from the first phase of installation, grub shows up and I was unable to continue with the installation.



2. Finally, after a lot of hassle, I installed Windows XP to sdb so that i can get backups of important files from the other HDD.



Then, I connected only 250G and installed Windows in it, formatting C:\. Even if i connect the 160G in the SATA channel 2, I at least get windows (no grub).





Then I connected the 160G in SATA 1 and 250G in SATA 2 (or maybe 0 & 1 :confused:)..I install redhat in sda, with bootloader installed in MBR of sda...everything is fine, except Windows does not load..after I select windows from the list, i get:



"Booting Windows

rootnoverify (hd1, 0)

chainloader +1"



and then sits there.





Linux, however, is working properly. Here's the content of my /boot/grub/grub.conf file





==============

# grub.conf generated by anaconda
#
# Note that you do not have to rerun grub after making changes to this file
# NOTICE: You have a /boot partition. This means that
# all kernel and initrd paths are relative to /boot/, eg.
# root (hd0,0)
# kernel /vmlinuz-version ro root=/dev/sda5
# initrd /initrd-version.img
#boot=/dev/sda
default=1
timeout=5
splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz
hiddenmenu
title Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server (2.6.18-8.el5)
root (hd0,0)
kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-8.el5 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb quiet
initrd /initrd-2.6.18-8.el5.img
title Other
rootnoverify (hd1,0)
chainloader +1
==============

[root@localhost ~]# df -h
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda5 965M 224M 692M 25% /
/dev/sda1 494M 15M 454M 4% /boot
tmpfs 1.3G 0 1.3G 0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda6 965M 18M 898M 2% /home
/dev/sda2 2.9G 1.6G 1.2G 57% /usr
/dev/sdc1 3.8G 1.6G 2.2G 43% /media/disk

==================================
[root@localhost ~]# fdisk -l

Disk /dev/sda: 160.0 GB, 160040803840 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 19457 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 * 1 65 522081 83 Linux
/dev/sda2 66 447 3068415 83 Linux
/dev/sda3 448 829 3068415 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sda4 830 19457 149629410 5 Extended
/dev/sda5 830 956 1020096 83 Linux
/dev/sda6 957 1083 1020096 83 Linux

Disk /dev/sdb: 250.0 GB, 250059350016 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 30401 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sdb1 * 1 3187 25599546 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdb2 3188 30400 218588422+ f W95 Ext'd (LBA)
/dev/sdb5 3188 9561 51199123+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdb6 9562 17210 61440561 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdb7 17211 23584 51199123+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/sdb8 23585 30400 54749488+ 7 HPFS/NTFS
============================


I know that's a lot..but i need help :(

[Klark]

Then, I connected only 250G and installed Windows in it, formatting C:\. Even if i connect the 160G in the SATA channel 2, I at least get windows (no grub).

Then I connected the 160G in SATA 1 and 250G in SATA 2 (or maybe 0 & 1 )..I install redhat in sda, with bootloader installed in MBR of sda...everything is fine, except Windows does not load..after I select windows from the list, i get:


Ok, I need to get a few things straight. You're installing Windows on a SATA hard drive without having the other one installed at the time of Windows installation? Then you take it out, replace it with Linux and move the Windows hard drive to channel 2?

Is that right?

[Hoplite]

You're installing Windows on a SATA hard drive without having the other one installed at the time of Windows installation?
Yes.

Here is the update:

1. I have windows in 250G & linux in 160G
2. If I connect 250G in SATA Channel 1, I get windows windows without grub loader, even if the 160 is connected in SATA Channel 2 (which is natural I believe)
3. If i connect 160G in SATA Channel 1 & 250G in Channel 2, I get the grub loader with options both for linux & XP. I have no problem at accessing linux. However, when I try to boot windows, i get the same old message

=====================
"Booting Windows

rootnoverify (hd1, 0)

chainloader +1"
=====================

It may be mentioned that I have installed a fresh copy of windows and then linux (with grub installed in MBR of /dev/sda)....

I'm so :confused: :(

[Klark]

Why don't you leave both plugged in to the computer when installing on either hard drive? I've never run into this problem before.

What I've done in the past is installed Linux on one hard drive, because Linux automatically gives you a choice screen prior to logging in each time you fire it up.

Then I install Windows on the other hard drive without removing them or moving them around.

Then when I log into Windows, everything is fine. When I log into Linux everything is fine.

Perhaps you've tried this and it didn't work? The reason I suggest this is because I've never had trouble dual-booting when I've installed this way, and there is a small chance that installing the systems on the same channel with SATA hard drives is what's causing the interference.

[Hoplite]

Perhaps you've tried this and it didn't work? The reason I suggest this is because I've never had trouble dual-booting when I've installed this way, and there is a small chance that installing the systems on the same channel with SATA hard drives is what's causing the interference.

I have tried doing that too. Installing linux (with the bootloader) is not the problem..the problem starts when i start installing windows..after the first restart, I get the grub loader with linux or windows booting options (and i can not continue with the installation)...if i select windows, grub tries to boot from windows, which does not boot...dunno why it's happening :confused:

[Klark]

I have tried doing that too. Installing linux (with the bootloader) is not the problem..the problem starts when i start installing windows..after the first restart, I get the grub loader with linux or windows booting options (and i can not continue with the installation)...if i select windows, grub tries to boot from windows, which does not boot...dunno why it's happening :confused:

I'd install Windows first, so you can get it installed properly, then install Linux second. That way, you won't have to worry about the option screen until you're dealing with Linux anyway.

[Hoplite]

Sorry for the delay, actually I was out of Dhaka for a while...Thank you Klark, though I haven't tried it yet, I think it should work :D

[Hoplite]

could anyone please explain how to add softwares in linux..

i tried tar/zip files..however, i'm not clear about the make and make install steps..i get dependecy failures too....
where can i find rpms for application sofrwares? i stumbled upon some rpms, but i get dependency problems..

another dumb question: is "C:\Program Files" == "/usr/lib" ?? or are the programs installed in a different location??

[Klark]

could anyone please explain how to add softwares in linux..

i tried tar/zip files..however, i'm not clear about the make and make install steps..i get dependecy failures too....
where can i find rpms for application sofrwares? i stumbled upon some rpms, but i get dependency problems..

another dumb question: is "C:\Program Files" == "/usr/lib" ?? or are the programs installed in a different location??

Most programs will be installed in the user/lib folder.

The best way is to use the install program that came with the linux distro you're using. It might be Yum, it might be Yast, or another installer. Click on the start menu button in the bottom corner (if you're using a KDE environment) and in the search box type "install".

From there you can search for programs and install them with all their dependencies without having to manually do so with the terminal.

Hope that helps.

[zeroxwolfx]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, so it's not as catchy as PC and Mac, but even Linux users will need some help.


Catchy as in popular? Or catchy as in flashy with lots of glitz and zaz?

If its the later one, I would tend to disagree. Ubuntu, at least the last time I used it, had some nice graphical, GUI features. Not only that, but it handles them much better. If I'm going to run aero on vista, I have to have at least a gig of memory just to keep everything else running well. From what I've heard from mac's they run their highly graphical and polished GUI with no trouble, which is what I'd expect for the price...

I like linux, and I'm sad its not more popular, with new distros these now-a-days, operating and installing them can be a snap. If you want it to play games though, be ready for some disappointment. Granted I was able to get oblivion to run on it, (sort of) but then again that was two years ago, they may have updated it by them.

Besides for games, I actually prefer linux over any other operating system.

[Hoplite]

Most programs will be installed in the user/lib folder.

The best way is to use the install program that came with the linux distro you're using. It might be Yum, it might be Yast, or another installer. Click on the start menu button in the bottom corner (if you're using a KDE environment) and in the search box type "install".

From there you can search for programs and install them with all their dependencies without having to manually do so with the terminal.

Hope that helps.

thanks man...i'm really a novice, so could you please clear some more confusions? i'm using Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5

why do i need to make or make install tar files??

plus, suppose i download a 3rd party rpm..and after i install it, how do i run it in case it did not come to the "start menu"..can i add it to that menu?

i tried "rpm -ql rpm_name" to get all the paths of that rpm..but i still am confused how to execute that particular program...

and any suggestions in configuring yast?? i can configure yum, but i don't think my distro has yast in it :confused: ..

thanks again :D

[Ieliv]

Hello, I too use linux! I've run/ran Ubuntu Versions Hardy through Jaunty. Mostly 32bit but I have a 64bit install also (though not currently working, hd crash:()

I use mostly openbox anymore. If anyone needs help transitioning from gnome to openbox or configuring openbox or wants to know more feel free to ask.
Its basically a light weight desktop manager.

If anyone needs any help with terminal commands I can possibly assist, no guarentee though. I don't know everything there is to know, and I don't know most of it, I know alot, of miscellaneous stuff though.
Hey I'm still somewhat human...(about 10%lol)

I prefer linux to windows, but I'm not going to go about the benefits of one over another, cause its been said and done (too many times). I use both, windows, for audio production, and linux for everything else.

[Klark]

Catchy as in popular? Or catchy as in flashy with lots of glitz and zaz?

I was actually referring to the line "Hi, I'm a linux." 'Twas a joke on the whole Mac/PC "Hello" commercials.

Hoplite, yast cant be configured with Red Hat, I believe. It only does what Yum does anyway. As for tar packages, that's just what Linux requires like PCs take .exe files and Macs use .dmg files.

Still working on thr rpm thing. I've never used Red Hat but my friend has. Waiting to hear back from him.

[Hoplite]

As for tar packages, that's just what Linux requires like PCs take .exe files and Macs use .dmg files.

the only problem with tar/gz/bz files are dependencies...sometimes, rpm's have the same problems too...man, windows is much easier to use in certain cases

however, using i'm kinda enjoying learning linux :D

ps. thanks Klark...you've really helped me solve many confusions :)

[Hoplite]

my cousin has a CentOS server that uses 2 400G SCSI hdds..the summary of the partition table is

/boot on /dev/md0 (about 200M, sda1 & sdb1)
/ on /dev/md1 (about 375G, sda2 & sdb2)
swap on /dev/md2 (about 4.5G)


all of the raid devices are in RAID 1...what happened is that, one of the disks (probably sda) got physically damaged..however, the system is still running on the other one

i put the active hdd in sda and added a fresh 400G hdd (sdb) in the RAID array with exactly same sized partitions..md0 & md2 are rebuilt successfully..but after about 28% of rebuilding in md1, it starts again from 0%. i tried this with 2 fresh hard disks, but both hard disks restart rebuilding around at 30%....dunno what the problem is :confused:...should i conclude that the active hdd is faulty?

ps. do i need to format the fresh hdd before adding?

[Klark]

my cousin has a CentOS server that uses 2 400G SCSI hdds..the summary of the partition table is

/boot on /dev/md0 (about 200M, sda1 & sdb1)
/ on /dev/md1 (about 375G, sda2 & sdb2)
swap on /dev/md2 (about 4.5G)


all of the raid devices are in RAID 1...what happened is that, one of the disks (probably sda) got physically damaged..however, the system is still running on the other one

i put the active hdd in sda and added a fresh 400G hdd (sdb) in the RAID array with exactly same sized partitions..md0 & md2 are rebuilt successfully..but after about 28% of rebuilding in md1, it starts again from 0%. i tried this with 2 fresh hard disks, but both hard disks restart rebuilding around at 30%....dunno what the problem is :confused:...should i conclude that the active hdd is faulty?

ps. do i need to format the fresh hdd before adding?


You might find that formatting solves the problem, if it does not, there is the chance that the active hdd was damaged.

It may come down to using another system and hooking up both hard drives as external drives and copying, although if the damage isn't physical, the mirrored drive would have the same problem.

[Hoplite]

You might find that formatting solves the problem, if it does not, there is the chance that the active hdd was damaged.

It may come down to using another system and hooking up both hard drives as external drives and copying, although if the damage isn't physical, the mirrored drive would have the same problem.

worth trying...i'll try and let you know by Sunday..thanks :)

[Hoplite]

formatting didn't work...conclusion: the active hdd is faulty..didn't try copying manually...hopefully a Red Hat server will take over soon :whee:

[Hoplite]

hope i'm not getting too annoying...i'm not sure whether a bridged connection is required.

here's the scenario:

a pc has two LAN cards with different network address (suppose 192.168.10.1 & 192.168.20.1). now if i ping 192.168.20.1 from another pc with ip 192.168.10.10, would i get a reply? i'm not sure and i don't have the equipment to try at the moment...


another scenario:

a pc has to be configured as a gateway server. it has two LAN cards i.e. eth0 & eth1. i have configured 4 network addresses (class C) on eth0 (eth0:1, eth0:2....) and have specified these addresses as gateway addresses on corresponding client computers..

the other LAN card (eth1) has a real IP that has been provided by an ISP, and this IP would do all the works related to internet.

what i was thinking about is that, if i dont create a bridged connection between eth0 & eth1, then would i be able to create a connection between the internet and the LANs.

routing has been done properly for the LAN (the system automatically takes care of it :D).

additional information:

eth0:1 IPADDR=192.168.1.1
eth0:2 IPADDR=192.168.2.1
eth0:3 IPADDR=192.168.3.1
eth0:4 IPADDR=192.168.4.1

pinging from 192.168.1.10 to 192.168.1.1, 192.168.2.10, 192.168.3.10 and so on is successful. however, i can not ping to 4.2.2.1 from 192.168.1.10...

[Hoplite]

while configuring a mail server that would serve only one network, why would one want to use qmail, courrier imap or something like that? painful

[Hoplite]

hope i'm not getting too annoying...i'm not sure whether a bridged connection is required.

here's the scenario:

a pc has two LAN cards with different network address (suppose 192.168.10.1 & 192.168.20.1). now if i ping 192.168.20.1 from another pc with ip 192.168.10.10, would i get a reply? i'm not sure and i don't have the equipment to try at the moment...


another scenario:

a pc has to be configured as a gateway server. it has two LAN cards i.e. eth0 & eth1. i have configured 4 network addresses (class C) on eth0 (eth0:1, eth0:2....) and have specified these addresses as gateway addresses on corresponding client computers..

the other LAN card (eth1) has a real IP that has been provided by an ISP, and this IP would do all the works related to internet.

what i was thinking about is that, if i dont create a bridged connection between eth0 & eth1, then would i be able to create a connection between the internet and the LANs.

routing has been done properly for the LAN (the system automatically takes care of it :D).

additional information:

eth0:1 IPADDR=192.168.1.1
eth0:2 IPADDR=192.168.2.1
eth0:3 IPADDR=192.168.3.1
eth0:4 IPADDR=192.168.4.1

pinging from 192.168.1.10 to 192.168.1.1, 192.168.2.10, 192.168.3.10 and so on is successful. however, i can not ping to 4.2.2.1 from 192.168.1.10...



problem solved...i needed natting to communicate from private to public network...sorry for the delay

[Hoplite]

I've been using Debian 5 for about 3 months now (not at home of course :p). The best thing that I like most about Debian is that it's really lightweight (compared to Fedora or Red Hat). Was facing minor troubles at the beginning, but gradually getting used to it.

[Hoplite]

Currently working on configuring MRTG (Multi Router Traffic Grapher). Roughly configured MRTG in a specific machine, however, it still needs tons of work around the edges. Hope to get it done by next Friday :D.

[Vendetta]

Can folks recommend a Linux distro to use as a basic (read: Mincraft) server that I won't have to screw around with too much?
Also note that I'm not that familiar with Linux, so something easy to set-up and use would be ideal.

[Klark]

Can folks recommend a Linux distro to use as a basic (read: Mincraft) server that I won't have to screw around with too much?
Also note that I'm not that familiar with Linux, so something easy to set-up and use would be ideal.

Most Linux distros are easily set up, with the only pain-in-the-ass developing from finding the proper drivers for hardware.

Two of the best I've come across are openSUSE and Ubuntu. Most Linux server distros don't have a GUI, which can make them harder to work with, but from what I'm seeing you want, any of the two I named should work fine for you.

Others to check out would include Red Hat, Fedora, and Debian.

A smidge of research on each distro I mentioned will either help you make your choice or lead you to a distro that will suit your needs the best!

Good luck and let us know which one you pick.

[Vendetta]

Sorry for the delay, but thanks. Yeah, leaning towards Ubuntu based on recommendations here, from friends, and dad.

[Klark]

Sorry for the delay, but thanks. Yeah, leaning towards Ubuntu based on recommendations here, from friends, and dad.

It's a very solid system and worked flexibly on the Dell I used for the install. I think you'll like it and there are many plug-ins that helped me get by any hardware issues I came up against.

[NeonLightChild]

The GNOME platform for Ubuntu is great. I'm not so much a fan of the KDE version. My parents have it on their computer, and I'm getting fed up with how much difficulty they have with it, as well as how frustrated I get trying to figure it out too.

[Hoplite]

has anyone tried Red Hat Enterprise 6 yet? I couldn't access one yet.

And Ubuntu rocks :rockon:. To me, the best Linux distro for desktop.

[Hoplite]

I am administering a couple of servers, and I was planning to change their names. There is going to be no DNS issues, since the Servers do not need registered FQDN. I was wondering if someone could provide some some interesting names... :)

Currently, they having boring names like mail, proxy, domain and so on and so forth. I was thinking:

Colors: blue, black, gray, green...
Deities: Athena, Zeus, Poseidon
Characters: Heracles, Arkantos, Marcus, Kratos...
Animals: Tiger, Lion, Wolf, Monkey...

Any idea would be appreciated :beerchug:

[Hoplite]

I have named two of my Proxy Servers as 'firefly' and 'busy-bee' :D