Frans van Dunné wrote:
> I've tried to make a clean install using the Beta 2 installer .iso.
>
> The installer runs through all the stages, but does not ask for a
> root password (which I found odd).
Welcome to Ubuntu You can set a root password if you wish once you
have booted the system.

> At the end of the installation process, it recommends to reboot, but
> it cannot boot from the harddisk.
Check the drive settings in grub, sometimes the installer sees the
drives in a different order to how the BIOS and installed system see it.
You may have to change the drive eg from (hd2,4) to (hd0,4) to get your
system to boot.

> One caveat for users installing this next to an older installation:
> if you leave a swap partition in existence on another harddisk, the
> installer will claim that 'linux-rt' cannot be downloaded.
>
I have two swap partitions on other drives and did not get this problem.

Ross.
_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel

Sat Feb 28 23:30:02 2009
Return-path: <ubuntu-users-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com>
Envelope-to: tom@linux-archive.org
Delivery-date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:57:15 +0200
Received: from chlorine.canonical.com ([91.189.94.204]:36008)
by s2.java-tips.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <ubuntu-users-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com>)
id 1LdWFH-0004jW-Ff
for tom@linux-archive.org; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 22:57:15 +0200
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=chlorine.canonical.com)
by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <ubuntu-users-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com>)
id 1LdWJb-000546-5x; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:01:43 +0000
Received: from smtp-04.mariel.uservers.net ([64.34.197.241])
by chlorine.canonical.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <victoratrejo@aprisaproyectos.com>)
id 1LdWJY-000541-5V
for ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 21:01:40 +0000
Received: (qmail 5399 invoked from network); 28 Feb 2009 15:01:39 -0600
Received: from unknown (HELO VTP) (189.136.118.137)
by smtp-04.mariel.uservers.net with SMTP; 28 Feb 2009 15:01:38 -0600
Message-ID: <39E9B4F1994F48F8B86125656669A546@VTP>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Víctor_A._Trejo_Peña? <victoratrejo@aprisaproyectos.com>
To: "Ubuntu user technical support,
not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com>
References: <49920065.2070400@gmail.com> <gmtg9b$5v6$2@ger.gmane.org> <49924B47.1060405@tigershaunt.com> <49925151.7030701@dinamis.com> <4992E5B0.4000204@sbcglobal.net> <goaf5v$cjb$1@ger.gmane.org><49A94BFD.4040101@cmc. net>
<goc55g$dne$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <goc55g$dne$1@ger.gmane.org>
Subject: Ubuntu is messing up with USB pen drive
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:01:35 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6000.16480
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6000.16669
X-BeenThere: ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
Reply-To: "Ubuntu user technical support,
not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com>
List-Id: "Ubuntu user technical support,
not for general discussions" <ubuntu-users.lists.ubuntu.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users>,
<mailto:ubuntu-users-request@lists.ubuntu.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users>
List-Post: <mailto:ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com>
List-Help: <mailto:ubuntu-users-request@lists.ubuntu.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users>,
<mailto:ubuntu-users-request@lists.ubuntu.com?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ubuntu-users-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com
Errors-To: ubuntu-users-bounces@lists.ubuntu.com

I have been usinng Ubuntu 8.10 (Intrepid) for several days now. Last night,
I started having issues while moving files to a USB pen drive (2Gb). I have
enough RAM and and a fair processor, and had alredy been using the same pen
drive for a day or two without noticing anything wrong.

Now, it takes up to 10 minutes to copy a SINGLE file (about 10 MB).

Has anything failed?

Thanks in advance.


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote:
>
>> The installer runs through all the stages, but does not ask for a root
>> password (which I found odd).
>
> This is normal because 3.0 is based on Ubuntu and not Debian. Ubuntu's
> security policy is to *not* have a root login... instead doing everything
> through sudo. They claim that having a root login (or using 'su')
> promotes unsafe practices.
>
Using root and su does promote unsafe practises. As an aside, sudo can
be logged and locked down to specific apps for specific users. Sudo is
simply awesome.

> ...of course, I'm not sure that allowing 'sudo su' is much safer... but
> that would be flame bait, wouldn't it...

There was a recent "discussion" about these issues. The 64Studio
default for sudo not requiring a password appals me but I believe the
consensus was to keep that default going forward. You can prevent sudo
from running su quite easily.

In case Daniel and Free missed it, I think the current default is bad.
No need to discuss it further since my position will not change and I
can always make 64Studio behave in a way that is consistent with my own
policies.
>
>> At the end of the installation process, it
>> recommends to reboot, but it cannot boot from the harddisk.
>
> Did you make sure that your root partition is marked with the 'bootable'
> flag?
>
Also, how many hard drives are in this machine? Perhaps the boot order
is messed up in the BIOS or there are two or more bootable devices (I
see this with the odd USB drive)? There are a number of possibilities.
Try to simplify as much as possible.

>> One caveat for users installing this next to an older installation: if you
>> leave a swap partition in existence on another harddisk, the installer
>> will claim that 'linux-rt' cannot be downloaded.
>
> This doesn't make sense. Is the problem that you ran out of memory... or
> that some benign swap partition on another disk blocked your download?
> And why was it trying to download a kernel? The ISO ships with a kernel.
>
That does seem to be a weird problem.

>> I will try to do a clean install with good old 2.1 and then update to 3
>> from there.
>
> This will probably NOT work. The upgrade path is Debian Etch ->
> Ubuntu Hardy. While it might work... you will likely have stability
> issues.
>
It worked for me in a test VM. I am still a believer in a clean first
install though, especially for the less experienced users.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJqfLuwRXgH3rKGfMRAmf/AJ9rLLp6cmp+EiP+TUSdzRT2siNUCgCfX2uV
FRZRyfCbmmzdWnm5SOyto6k=
=XKL3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel

Thank you all for your help.

After much trial and error: The problem was with the harddisk setup.

My previous installation was on a IDE harddisk, and I tried to keep that
installation by marking it "do not use" in the partition manager.

However: GRUB cannot deal with this (there are other messages online about
the same problem, related to the priorities that are assigned to hardware
on installation, versus priorities on booting). The only way to make GRUB
install in the proper place turned out to be to unplug the older IDE
harddisk.

I also put the System SATA disk in SATA connection nr. 1 on the
motherboard, but expect that this was a superfluous action.

So after removing the IDE disk, the installation was super smooth! And is
up and running right now.

As for the weird "cannot download linux-rt" message. My experience so far
is that the installer will behave strangely on problems. Seldom is there a
direct relation between the cause of the problem and the message
displayed.

Thanks for explaining the oddities with root passwords in the new
installer. I'll get used to it.

Thanks you all for the help,
Frans.

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Gabriel M. Beddingfield wrote:
>>
>>> The installer runs through all the stages, but does not ask for a root
>>> password (which I found odd).
>>
>> This is normal because 3.0 is based on Ubuntu and not Debian. Ubuntu's
>> security policy is to *not* have a root login... instead doing
>> everything
>> through sudo. They claim that having a root login (or using 'su')
>> promotes unsafe practices.
>>
> Using root and su does promote unsafe practises. As an aside, sudo can
> be logged and locked down to specific apps for specific users. Sudo is
> simply awesome.
>
>> ...of course, I'm not sure that allowing 'sudo su' is much safer... but
>> that would be flame bait, wouldn't it...
>
> There was a recent "discussion" about these issues. The 64Studio
> default for sudo not requiring a password appals me but I believe the
> consensus was to keep that default going forward. You can prevent sudo
> from running su quite easily.
>
> In case Daniel and Free missed it, I think the current default is bad.
> No need to discuss it further since my position will not change and I
> can always make 64Studio behave in a way that is consistent with my own
> policies.
>>
>>> At the end of the installation process, it
>>> recommends to reboot, but it cannot boot from the harddisk.
>>
>> Did you make sure that your root partition is marked with the 'bootable'
>> flag?
>>
> Also, how many hard drives are in this machine? Perhaps the boot order
> is messed up in the BIOS or there are two or more bootable devices (I
> see this with the odd USB drive)? There are a number of possibilities.
> Try to simplify as much as possible.
>
>>> One caveat for users installing this next to an older installation: if
>>> you
>>> leave a swap partition in existence on another harddisk, the installer
>>> will claim that 'linux-rt' cannot be downloaded.
>>
>> This doesn't make sense. Is the problem that you ran out of memory...
>> or
>> that some benign swap partition on another disk blocked your download?
>> And why was it trying to download a kernel? The ISO ships with a
>> kernel.
>>
> That does seem to be a weird problem.
>
>>> I will try to do a clean install with good old 2.1 and then update to 3
>>> from there.
>>
>> This will probably NOT work. The upgrade path is Debian Etch ->
>> Ubuntu Hardy. While it might work... you will likely have stability
>> issues.
>>
> It worked for me in a test VM. I am still a believer in a clean first
> install though, especially for the less experienced users.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFJqfLuwRXgH3rKGfMRAmf/AJ9rLLp6cmp+EiP+TUSdzRT2siNUCgCfX2uV
> FRZRyfCbmmzdWnm5SOyto6k=
> =XKL3
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>


_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel

Hi Gustin,

> The 64Studio
> default for sudo not requiring a password appals me but I believe the
> consensus was to keep that default going forward.

For the single user case (e.g. mobile device) it's not so bad, for the
multi user case (e.g. busy studio DAW) it's really not good. Thanks for
the reminder, I'll open a ticket :-)

Cheers!

Daniel
_______________________________________________
64studio-devel mailing list
64studio-devel@lists.64studio.com
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-devel