PDA

View Full Version : [ubuntu] iso question.



Kellemora
August 4th, 2010, 09:46 PM
Hi Gang

Excuse me if this is really a dumb question, but it seems logical to me.

OK, you can download an .iso and burn it to a CD and boot from the CD.
You can download an .iso and place it on a USB stick and boot from the stick.

However, I have several computers that 8.04 will install from a CD, but 10.04 won't for some reason. The CD is OK and so is the USB stick as they were used to make the install on other computers just fine.

So here is my question:

Can you place it on a partition on your Hard Drive and boot it from that Partition? In a computer that it won't install on from CD or USB.

My last step would be to pull the Hard Drive out, put it into a computer that can install it, then move it back to the computer and see what happens. However, this is a major task due to where the computers themselves are located.

TTUL
Gary

-kg-
August 4th, 2010, 10:53 PM
...I have several computers that 8.04 will install from a CD, but 10.04 won't for some reason. The CD is OK and so is the USB stick as they were used to make the install on other computers just fine.

So here is my question:

Can you place it on a partition on your Hard Drive and boot it from that Partition? In a computer that it won't install on from CD or USB.

In a nutshell, no. The .iso is meant to be installed on a removable drive (that's why it's called a disk image) and you'll have to be able to boot to it in order for it to run. You can't just copy the image to a partition and boot to it, any more than you can just copy the image to the CD or USB drive...it has to be installed to the CD or Flash drive.

One thing...you say:


...I have several computers that 8.04 will install from a CD

Have you tried that recently, or did you install 8.04 some time in the past? If you can install 8.04 on those computers at this time, you might consider clean-installing 8.04 then upgrading that installation to 10.04.

snowpine
August 4th, 2010, 11:12 PM
However, I have several computers that 8.04 will install from a CD, but 10.04 won't for some reason.

Please clarify which of the following is the case:

1) 10.04 runs fine as a Live CD, but won't install

2) 10.04 neither runs as a Live CD nor installs

Kellemora
August 4th, 2010, 11:41 PM
Well, gang, I've come to the conclusion that 10.04 is still a LONG WAY AWAY from being ready for distribution........

When they quit supporting 8.04 I guess I'll start looking for a different Distro......

I just spent the last couple of hours installing 10.04 on our newest computers.

Ran fine for awhile then CRASHED......ALL OF THEM!

I've been running 8.04 since it came out and have NEVER had ANY of the problems I've had with 10.04.
For the most part 8.04 runs perfectly right out of the box.
I can install it on ANY computer here, and have and other than my learning curve I had to overcome, it was a SNAP to install and use.

In scanning through the boards all I see is the same problems I'm having with no resolutions forthcoming in any of the gazillion posts I've read since 10.4 was first released.

If it don't work on current model computers and is not backwards compatible with existing computers. And even if one does manage to get it installed and working OK for a few days or hours and it keeps crashing and locking up the computer that the only way out of it is a cold boot.
It needs to be placed in the CIRCULAR FILE where it belongs....

As far as I'm concerned, as GREAT as Ubuntu WAS up until now, it's time for them to throw in the towel......
I don't know WHAT they DID to screw up a perfect operating system so bad!

At the rate they are going, they should support 8.04 at least another 3 years while they try to fix the billions of problems with 10.04.....

One would THINK they would have learned NOT to mess with a good thing!

Your supposed to improve and build upon something that works, not mess it up royally.....

I now have over 80 hours of messing with 10.04, it's just GARBAGE!
And that's what I'm doing with these 25+ disks I've burned of it.
Archive them in the Circular File!!!!!

TTUL
Gary

-kg-
August 4th, 2010, 11:53 PM
Sorry that we couldn't help you with your problems (of course, except for not being able to install it, you didn't mention what they were), but I've never had a bit of problem with it, from 8.04 right up through 10.04, which I'm using now.

Generally, the only thing you're going to read about in the Forums and boards are the problems. The ones who don't have any problems (like me) rarely post with problems, for obvious reasons. Just because you can't get the recent Ubuntu to work for you doesn't make it trash...either you're doing something wrong, you have a hardware malfunction, or your computers aren't compatible with it in some way.

There are many OS distributions out there. Distrowatch (http://distrowatch.com/) lists several hundred of them. Take your choice.

snowpine
August 4th, 2010, 11:57 PM
Hi Gary, I feel your frustration, I really do :)

If the 10.04 Live CD does not work well, then I obviously do not recommend installing 10.04 or upgrading from 8.04 to 10.04.

You mention the crash occurs on several computers, do they have similar hardware? If so, it might be worth looking for a hardware component these computers have in common that may be causing the crash. For example, if they all have the same video card, that is a valuable clue.

You might also look at the release notes (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidLynx/ReleaseNotes) and bug tracker (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs) to see if your issue has been reported by other users.

Of course I understand it may or may not be worth your time to troubleshoot the issue; personally I have found that Debian is a very stable alternative to Ubuntu. :) And then of course there are the "enterprise" distros (like Red Hat) that you have to pay for, but are rock solid, have on-call support, and publish a list of certified hardware that is 100% guaranteed to work flawlessly.

Elmer Fudd
August 5th, 2010, 12:25 AM
Even if you are going to abandon Ubuntu, please do post a more robust description of your problem and hardware/software config.
Also, let us know what current distro you end up finding that does not have the problem. (other than 8.04).

waynefoutz
August 5th, 2010, 02:41 AM
Well, gang, I've come to the conclusion that 10.04 is still a LONG WAY AWAY from being ready for distribution........

When they quit supporting 8.04 I guess I'll start looking for a different Distro......

I just spent the last couple of hours installing 10.04 on our newest computers.

Ran fine for awhile then CRASHED......ALL OF THEM!

I've been running 8.04 since it came out and have NEVER had ANY of the problems I've had with 10.04.
For the most part 8.04 runs perfectly right out of the box.
I can install it on ANY computer here, and have and other than my learning curve I had to overcome, it was a SNAP to install and use.

In scanning through the boards all I see is the same problems I'm having with no resolutions forthcoming in any of the gazillion posts I've read since 10.4 was first released.

If it don't work on current model computers and is not backwards compatible with existing computers. And even if one does manage to get it installed and working OK for a few days or hours and it keeps crashing and locking up the computer that the only way out of it is a cold boot.
It needs to be placed in the CIRCULAR FILE where it belongs....

As far as I'm concerned, as GREAT as Ubuntu WAS up until now, it's time for them to throw in the towel......
I don't know WHAT they DID to screw up a perfect operating system so bad!

At the rate they are going, they should support 8.04 at least another 3 years while they try to fix the billions of problems with 10.04.....

One would THINK they would have learned NOT to mess with a good thing!

Your supposed to improve and build upon something that works, not mess it up royally.....

I now have over 80 hours of messing with 10.04, it's just GARBAGE!
And that's what I'm doing with these 25+ disks I've burned of it.
Archive them in the Circular File!!!!!

TTUL
Gary

I feel you. I'm still running 8.04 myself and I'm moving to Debian Lenny come April. I don't blame Ubuntu, my problem is ATI, who refuse to give any Linux support their two year old hardware.

waynefoutz
August 5th, 2010, 02:45 AM
Hi Gary, I feel your frustration, I really do :)

If the 10.04 Live CD does not work well, then I obviously do not recommend installing 10.04 or upgrading from 8.04 to 10.04.

You mention the crash occurs on several computers, do they have similar hardware? If so, it might be worth looking for a hardware component these computers have in common that may be causing the crash. For example, if they all have the same video card, that is a valuable clue.

You might also look at the release notes (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LucidLynx/ReleaseNotes) and bug tracker (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs) to see if your issue has been reported by other users.

Of course I understand it may or may not be worth your time to troubleshoot the issue; personally I have found that Debian is a very stable alternative to Ubuntu. :) And then of course there are the "enterprise" distros (like Red Hat) that you have to pay for, but are rock solid, have on-call support, and publish a list of certified hardware that is 100% guaranteed to work flawlessly.


CentOS is a free version of Red Hat. FYI. I agree with your assessment of Debian. If 8.04 is your computer's sweet spot like it is with my laptop, Debian is a good place to migrate to after Hardy is no longer supported.

Kellemora
August 5th, 2010, 04:03 AM
Hi Guys

Didn't mean to sound so harsh, but over 80 hours of fooling with an LTS Release is ridiculous.

I have a total of 8 computers here, 5 are right here in my office and all 5 have been running 8.04 since September of 2008. Both i386 and AMD64 versions.

I was new to GNU/Linux back then, made a lot of mistakes and had a huge learning curve to overcome. But once I felt comfortable with Ubuntu I converted my entire office over to Ubuntu and it has been GREAT!
I've only kept two machines with the Doze for POS, everything else is now GNU/Linux, Ubuntu 8.04 being my daily use.

ALL of my computers are triple boot; 2 are XP, Ubuntu, Debian; and 6 are Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS. I've been removing CentOS to install 10.04 since I didn't like CentOS (which is Red Hat).

My three newest computers are built-ups, 2 are Asus Mobo's, dual core AMD5200's, the 3rd is using a BioStar Mobo with dual core AMD. All of these are Nvidia. My slowest computer is an old Dell OptiPlex GX270, hate that thing! Next I have an HP Pavilion 753n I use with Ubuntu Server it handles my Data File Server, this was purchased to try to get an HP scanner working that we never did. The rest of the machines are Compaq or EMachines, off the shelf types. All of those are less than 5 years old.

Now it seems to me that if 8.04 runs perfectly on every one of them, and so does Debian and CentOS loaded onto the 6 without the Doze on it.
I have not tried Debian 5 yet as I've been STUCK on Ubuntu it worked so well.

It must be late and I'm tired. I can't find the button to press to tell me what the system architecture is or I would have given that info too.

Even on the NEW computers, less than a year old, IF 10.04 loads, it will run for about an hour and then CRASH and LOCK UP to the point it requires a cold boot. I ran the entire bank of System Tests provided in the Ubuntu package with NO ERRORS, and all the Video Tests also worked perfectly.

I realize only the problems are posted, usually. That is a VALUABLE RESOURCE as you can look up HOW such problems were resolved.
But what I'm finding regarding 10.04 is that the problems are NOT being resolved short of buying a new computer. Well, mine ARE new, the 3 main ones anyhow, and 10.04 doesn't work on them either.

I do realize I had to do some tweaking with 8.04 to get it just the way I wanted it. But nonetheless, it still works right out of the box.

I tried 10.04 when it was first released, had the same problems back then, so I waited and waited and finally grabbed the latest release, thinking they may have worked out some of the bugs. I guess not!

I don't understand HOW they can have Long Term Support on something that doesn't work to start with!

I still say they need to Scrap the 10.04 Disaster and Support 8.04 until they can get a working new release or just dump it and start over.

TTUL
Gary

snowpine
August 5th, 2010, 12:18 PM
Hi Gary, here is another thing to consider: Are you using the same Ubuntu 10.04 Live CD on all of these computers, and if so, have you run the utility to check the disk for defects? If it's a bad burn, you could run it on 1000 computers and it would crash on all of them...

waynefoutz
August 5th, 2010, 12:50 PM
Gary, if 8.04 is your preferred version, Debian 5 is probably where you want to migrate to come April. I'd give it a try on one of your machines now. There are only slight differences between Lenny and Hardy. Compiz, desktop effects aren't installed by default, neither is network-manager for wireless connections. But they're right there in synaptic. Debian doesn't hold your hand like Ubuntu does when it comes to installing hardware drivers, but if you've been around Ubuntu for as long as you have that shouldn't be much of a challenge.

Installing Debian is different, there is no live cd,at least one you can install from, but the installer is graphical and not hard at all. Also, when you go to Debian's site, you'll see a bunch of cds or dvds to download. Don't be put off by that, all you need is the first cd. Boot off of that, and as long as the computer has a hard ethernet connection, it will download any additional packages it needs. There's no need to download and burn anything but the first 650 megabyte cd. Version 5, (Lenny) is about on par with Hardy (8.04) as far as age and software versions.

That's the route I'm taking next April on this laptop I'm using. 8.04 runs better than 10.04 for me because of an older ATI GPU that ATI no longer provides Linux support for.

waynefoutz
August 5th, 2010, 12:58 PM
Hi Gary, here is another thing to consider: Are you using the same Ubuntu 10.04 Live CD on all of these computers, and if so, have you run the utility to check the disk for defects? If it's a bad burn, you could run it on 1000 computers and it would crash on all of them...

I personally think 10.04 is the worst version ever put out there. I've been an Ubuntu user since 6.10. Lucid is fine if it works, but almost half the computers I've tried to install it to suffer from the booting into a blank screen problem. That's a minor pain if I'm doing it, but I have a daughter that lives some 2000 miles away and I was trying to talk her through a Linux Mint install over the phone. Ubuntu and Mint both, blank screen. I ended up having her burn and install PCLinuxOS.

Kellemora
August 5th, 2010, 03:43 PM
Hi Wayne

Thanks for the info!

I DO HAVE Debian 4 on my machines already.......

One of the reasons I went with Ubuntu 8.04 was I didn't have to keep putting the disk in the CD drive and having it not work.

Right now, that's my downfall about Debian!

I went to Synaptic to install something, it asks for the CD, I put that in, it loads part of the download then starts asking for the CD that's already in the drive. So I said lump it and went with Ubuntu 8.04 and it's been GREAT, runs on everything.

I did notice Debian has #5 out, I have plenty of room, most of my Hard Drives are 500 gigs. Trouble is, my last install of Ubuntu I placed /home on it's own partition, and I've been afraid other Distro's might try using it. And since I use a File Server for my Data Files I figured as I redo things, I would go back to having /home in it's own partition with the Distro it goes with.

I know CentOS, Debian 2 and Debian 4 didn't mess with the /home partition as they all have a /home in their own partition.

But I DO LIKE Ubuntu! Have no idea what they changed to make the new version so useless.....

TTUL
Gary

Kellemora
August 5th, 2010, 03:45 PM
Hi Snowpine

No, I now have 25+ disks I've burned, plus 2 USB sticks, before I realized it was NOT the CD's causing the problems, it's the 10.04 OS that's the problem.

TTUL
Gary

snowpine
August 5th, 2010, 03:54 PM
One of the reasons I went with Ubuntu 8.04 was I didn't have to keep putting the disk in the CD drive and having it not work.

Right now, that's my downfall about Debian!

I went to Synaptic to install something, it asks for the CD, I put that in, it loads part of the download then starts asking for the CD that's already in the drive.

You need to edit /etc/apt/sources.list, comment out the CD-ROM line(s) with a # symbol, and use the online repos. Here is a sources generator if you need it: http://debgen.simplylinux.ch/


No, I now have 25+ disks I've burned, plus 2 USB sticks, before I realized it was NOT the CD's causing the problems, it's the 10.04 OS that's the problem.

Yes, but were the 25 disks all burned from the same .iso? ;)

oldfred
August 5th, 2010, 05:40 PM
You mentioned nvidia. I had absolutely no problems with Karmic and expected the same with Lucid, but Lucid turned off my monitor just after the start of install. But since I was using USB it could see USB still flashing so install was still working. Adding nomodeset got me over the hump but some with other video cards required different settings.

I had to do this:
boot from the cd, press F6 and then select the nomodeset option.
(I edited my grub.cfg as I use grub to boot ISO on USB, or in USB's syslinux.cfg or text.cfg)
then
On first boot after install, press e on getting the GRUB bootloader.
Using arrow keys navigate to and delete quiet and splash and type the word nomodeset in their place
Press Ctrl and X to boot (low graphics mode)

Kellemora
August 6th, 2010, 11:31 AM
Hi Wayne, Snopine & Fred

I used different downloads of 10.04 not the same one.
I used different burners and burning programs as well.

I DID GET 10.04 up and running on an Intel Pentium 4 32 bit machine, it appeared to be OK, but then after about an hour of usage, it would crash n burn, totally locking up the system. Video is Brookdale G/GE chipset an 82845G. Some other machines are 82865G. Most of my machines are Nvidia now though because I've never had problems with Nvidia they supply Linux drivers also. Whereas ATI seems to forget about the world out there.

I popped in to say, as of 5:30AM this morning, I had Debian 505 installed in place of CentOS on ALL of our machines. The install went flawlessly. I have BOTH 32 bit and 64 bit versions where applicable.

The three computers that REFUSED to install 10.04 took like a duck to water with Debian 505. Needless to say, I double and triple checked my 10.04 install CD's and even burned brand new ones on a brand new burner too. I installed the new burn of 10.04 on a machine that 10.04 was already on by wiping the partition and starting over. Went just fine, still crashed later though. Then on the 3 machines I was having trouble with. Still NADA, the machines act like they can't read the disk, the SAME DISK I just installed 10.04 from on another machine.

I wanted to make sure someone couldn't come along and say, well if Debian 505 loaded without a problem, then 10.04 should have, as it's the same program. 505 acts and feels just like 8.04 to me.

The good point is, I can now keep running 8.04 and the Ubuntu I love, knowing I have a backup system to fall back on if they never get 10.04 working before they quit updating 8.04.

TTUL
Gary

snowpine
August 6th, 2010, 01:17 PM
I popped in to say, as of 5:30AM this morning, I had Debian 505 installed in place of CentOS on ALL of our machines. The install went flawlessly. I have BOTH 32 bit and 64 bit versions where applicable.

Excellent choice! Maybe I'll see you over on the Debian forums? (Or maybe you won't need to post over there since Debian is so stable ;))

3rdalbum
August 6th, 2010, 01:36 PM
I've had great success with Ubuntu 10.04; it's been such a good version for me that I've actually been reluctant to test 10.10 and lose the 10.04 on my netbook.

But then, I've been using 8.10, 9.04 and 9.10 so I've been keeping on top of the changes between 8.04 and 10.04; if you haven't kept on top of the changes then I can see how frustrating it might be to type "sudo /etc/init.d/gdm start" and see "Command not found".

Just because 10.04 doesn't work well for you does not mean that it's bad for everyone.