There has been so much discussion on Natty and Unity, here is my two pfennigs or what ever currency you prefer:



It took me 3 tries to install it, first with the Desktop CD and two times with the Alternate CD (Text Mode).* I filed a bug report on the first failure.* On the second install, it failed at the Grub install and charged quantity one destroyed Windows XP partition for trying.* Attempted a retry on the grub install without restarting, it did not see the Windows XP partition any more but did install grub successfully. This was all on test system and I have a copy of the Windows XP partition squirreled away someplace.



On first logon, which I assume was the Ubuntu Desktop (Unity based).* I created a terminal launcher so I could do the command line work.* First thing I did was make sure the Nvidia driver was installed (it wasn't) but still no desktop icons, after a couple hours of fussing with desktop including down load time and updates, I finally got both desktops working (Classic and Ubuntu) and I don't like either even though Ubuntu looks nice, the Applications windows is on overload with all application icons showing, it should have had a by group option just as the Classic has.* Classic "didn't work" was my first thought because I couldn't find the menu drop down until I spotted the little down arrow scrunched at far right of the task bar next to the Ubuntu icon.



Two more pfennigs:* I loaded up my webserver configuration on Natty and found some of the packages were the same as 10.10!* I am not convinced that LibreOffice 3.3.1 is better than OpenOffice and there should be a choice.* Interesting enough is that LibreOffice is also available on the ArtistX (Ubuntu 10.04),* if one desires it on a LTS distribution.* In my tests of LibreOffice, it will not play Powerpoint files properly where OpenOffice will.* One needs a distribution that works.



I realize that this is an Alpha release but hey, we are less than 60 days out from the public release date and Ubuntu is still calling it Alpha.* I still remember what I think was the 9.04 release where it took a month following its public release to be stable.* No repeats please.





Deposit Made.
















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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 23:12, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:


On the second install, it failed at the Grub install and charged quantity one destroyed Windows XP partition for trying.* Attempted a retry on the grub install without restarting, it did not see the Windows XP partition any more but did install grub successfully. This was all on test system and I have a copy of the Windows XP partition squirreled away someplace.



--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

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




Have you installed some huge commercial softwares that use the Macrovision (vendor of InstallShield) FlexNet anti-piracy*technology like Adobe CS3-5 or newer AutoCADs in your XP? It's a shame that under such conditions Grub2 1.99 will ruin your first partition if it's formatted using NTFS.


See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225 -*grub-install trashes ntfs partition when sector 32 of the hard disk is occupied by Adobe FlexNet*for details.


Workaround: boot up your PC with a Windows 7 installation CD and then executechkdsk c: /f
Vista or XP CDs might be of no use due to restriction to theirs' chdksk utility.

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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 23:12, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:







On the second install, it failed at the Grub install and charged quantity one destroyed Windows XP partition for trying.* Attempted a retry on the grub install without restarting, it did not see the Windows XP partition any more but did install grub successfully. This was all on test system and I have a copy of the Windows XP partition squirreled away someplace.







--



ubuntu-users mailing list



ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com



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




















Have you installed some huge commercial softwares that use the Macrovision (vendor of InstallShield) FlexNet anti-piracy*technology like Adobe CS3-5 or newer AutoCADs in your XP? It's a shame that under such conditions Grub2 1.99 will ruin your first partition if it's formatted using NTFS.



Interesting that Grub2 1.99 would be released to the public with that known problem and risk.* One more pfennig deposited.



This particular bug is not listed in the release notes or know bugs. :-(* People need to be warned.* This dual boot configuration had been used to test installations of Ubuntu 10.10 and other Linux's without problem.* Don't know if I have Adobe FlexNet but I do know that my last CS version was 2 but I doubt that it was installed on this test partition, who knows, can't go back now and figure out what it had installed without doing a restore.














See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225 -*grub-install trashes ntfs partition when sector 32 of the hard disk is occupied by Adobe FlexNet*for details.












Workaround: boot up your PC with a Windows 7 installation CD and then execute



chkdsk c: /f










Vista or XP CDs might be of no use due to restriction to theirs' chdksk utility.



Tried XP CD, ran chkdsk twice, once with /P and then with /R, both times it reported unrecoverable.



Tried Win 7 Ultimate, it couldn't even find a Windows Operating system



Will have to find that backup that I have someplace... if I want to recover.



Just found out something else, Natty wouldn't pull an DHCP connection this AM but when I changed it to my primary network router, it pulled DHCP just fine. Something "trashed" the secondary downstream router since last night and I had to reboot it.* The only thing connected to router was Natty.



Thanks for you thoughts here.












Clint





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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:12 AM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:


> On first logon, which I assume was the Ubuntu Desktop (Unity based). I
> created a terminal launcher so I could do the command line work. First
> thing I did was make sure the Nvidia driver was installed (it wasn't) but
> still no desktop icons, after a couple hours of fussing with desktop
> including down load time and updates, I finally got both desktops working
> (Classic and Ubuntu) and I don't like either even though Ubuntu looks nice,
> the Applications windows is on overload with all application icons showing,
> it should have had a by group option just as the Classic has. Classic
> "didn't work" was my first thought because I couldn't find the menu drop
> down until I spotted the little down arrow scrunched at far right of the
> task bar next to the Ubuntu icon.

I like the 11.04 look of both Unity and "Classic" GNOME - except for
the colors (but I've never liked Ubuntu colors). Unity's lack of
configurability is a PitA though. I'd like to be able to resize the
dock on the left, re-order the icons on it, and resize the icons in
the "Applications" window. This window seems to be the in-vogue method
of launching apps that aren't in a dock/launcher/menu because of the
iPhone/iPad. Apple next iteration of OS X will have a similar setup
("Launchpad").


> Two more pfennigs: I loaded up my webserver configuration on Natty and
> found some of the packages were the same as 10.10!

I don't know to which packages you're referring in "webserver
configuration" but if apache2's one of the applications involved,
you're being rather harsh with the developers - both Apache's and
Ubuntu's. You can't expect major changes in every package every six
months.

Apache's current release is 2.2.17 and its development release is
2.3.11. Check out the various updates below from the changelog.

NATTY UPDATES:
apache2 (2.2.17-1ubuntu1) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.17-1) unstable; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-6ubuntu3) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-6ubuntu2) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-6ubuntu1) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-6) unstable; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-5) unstable; urgency=medium
apache2 (2.2.16-4ubuntu2) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-4ubuntu1) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-4) unstable; urgency=medium
apache2 (2.2.16-3ubuntu1) natty; urgency=low
apache2 (2.2.16-3) unstable; urgency=high
apache2 (2.2.16-2) unstable; urgency=low

LAST MAVERICK UPDATE:
apache2 (2.2.16-1ubuntu3) maverick; urgency=low


> I realize that this is an Alpha release but hey, we are less than 60 days
> out from the public release date and Ubuntu is still calling it Alpha.

There's about a week less between the release of alpha 3 and the final
release for Natty than there had been for Maverick and Lucid...

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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
> Have you installed some huge commercial softwares that use the Macrovision
> (vendor of InstallShield) FlexNet anti-piracy*technology like Adobe CS3-5 or
> newer AutoCADs in your XP? It's a shame that under such conditions Grub2
> 1.99 will ruin your first partition if it's formatted using NTFS.
>
> Interesting that Grub2 1.99 would be released to the public with that known
> problem and risk.* One more pfennig deposited.
>
> This particular bug is not listed in the release notes or know bugs. :-(
>
> See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225

The bug that you reference is marked as critical and the version name
of grub-pc includes "rc" ("1.99~rc1-3ubuntu3"). I don't think that
it's the first time that there's such a collision for core.img.

You shouldn't be surprised that an alpha release is buggy!

I hope that we'll default to GPT partitions soon enough so that
grub'll have its own mini-partition and not have to share the post-MBR
gap with Windows security/anti-piracy software chunks.

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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:




> Interesting that Grub2 1.99 would be released to the public with that known


> problem and risk.* One more pfennig deposited.


> This particular bug is not listed in the release notes or know bugs. :-(


> See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225


That link is not part of the release notes or known bug listing for Natty.


You shouldn't be surprised that an alpha release is buggy!


Some bugs are expected, just not ones with the capability to trash you system.












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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:12 AM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:




> Two more pfennigs: I loaded up my webserver configuration on Natty and found some of the packages were the same as 10.10!


I don't know to which packages you're referring in "webserver configuration" but if apache2's one of the applications involved, you're being rather harsh with the developers - both Apache's andUbuntu's.

You can't expect major changes in every package every six months.



Specifically, CakePHP in 11.04 is 1.3.2 (same as 10.10), the current stable release is 1.3.7. It was 1.2.5 in 10.04 so 10.10 (1.3.2) was a major improvement in the cake console, only 6 months later.


> I realize that this is an Alpha release but hey, we are less than 60 days out from the public release date and Ubuntu is still calling it Alpha.


There's about a week less between the release of alpha 3 and the final release for Natty than there had been for Maverick and Lucid...


I am fearing another 9.04 release... That one wasn't stable for a month until after its "public" release. It is better to delay than to ship buggy.

Also, Lucid was LTS and had a much longer development and testing period.









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

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 2:53 PM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
>> Interesting that Grub2 1.99 would be released to the public with that
>> known
>> problem and risk.* One more pfennig deposited.
>> This particular bug is not listed in the release notes or know bugs. :-(
>> See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225
>
> That link is not part of the release notes or known bug listing for Natty.
>
>? You shouldn't be surprised that an alpha release is buggy!
>
> Some bugs are expected, just not ones with the capability to trash you
> system.
>

Alpha releases are well-known (and usually advertised) as having bugs
that can do any amount of damage, including that which can be
catastrophic. Betas, not so much.

BTW, would you mind just posting in plain text? Using HTML leads to
quote (and other) confusion, like above.

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

>? You shouldn't be surprised that an alpha release is buggy!



Some bugs are expected, just not ones with the capability to trash your system.



Alpha releases are well-known (and usually advertised) as having bugs that can do any amount of damage, including that which can be catastrophic. Betas, not so much.


This one wasn't announced or advertised. Now it is, at least on this list.



BTW, would you mind just posting in plain text? Using HTML leads to quote (and other) confusion, like above.



I would love to post in plain text. I am using mail.com (AOL?) and they changed their editor a few months back

which I don't like and really messes with trying to bottom post. They have said that they are going to change

their default editor. Hope that happens soon!







--


ubuntu-users mailing list


ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com


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










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

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 06:53, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:


On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 1:53 PM, <clintin@linuxmail.org> wrote:




> Interesting that Grub2 1.99 would be released to the public with that known


> problem and risk.* One more pfennig deposited.


> This particular bug is not listed in the release notes or know bugs. :-(


> See*https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/grub2/+bug/730225


That link is not part of the release notes or known bug listing for Natty.
The bug was indeed confirmed and reported AFTER the Alpha-3 release and not everyone are installing those costly commercial warez on their sets. Adobe at least don't ship the sxxty stuff with its Flash Player and Adobe Reader.

Since the code was written in leap area, the only method to erase them is to use tools like WinHex and dd.



You shouldn't be surprised that an alpha release is buggy!


Some bugs are expected, just not ones with the capability to trash you system.













--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

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




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