Some questions before New Install Of 16.04.7

[O)9(yo&#]

boot-repair was fine for non-UEFI systems with 1-2 OSes. After that, really just use it for the "Gather Information" button so all the boot information gets posted where some smart people can check it out and make recommendations based on facts.

Virtualization has been popular since the 1990s. In 2004-ish, the company where I worked mandated that all new server deployments be virtual. That company had over 20K Windows servers and 40K Unix servers. Most were using less than 20% of the CPU, so it was a business imperative to get more business value/work from the systems. The new CPU goal was 80% utilization.

These days, many companies have move onto Linux Containers rather than virtualization. Those aren't all that useful for desktops, however.

If Resactux doesn't solve it, I'll use the boot repair disc to do what you suggested - post the info so smart people can figure it out (like you).

[CelticWarrior]

Do not use the Boot Repair disk (ISO). It hasn't been updated for years. Use a live session and install it from the PPA, i.e., the 2nd option: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Boot-Repair

[O)9(yo&#]

Do not use the Boot Repair disk (ISO). It hasn't been updated for years. Use a live session and install it from the PPA, i.e., the 2nd option: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Boot-Repair

Thanks, I was not aware of that. It has helped me out many times, but now I'll use the live session version.

the reason I got nervous about using it: the only time I was hacked (at least to my knowledge), I was on a composers forum, which uses the Flash player (I won't use it myself and have been telling them for years to get rid of it). I stepped away from my computer for a bit, and when I returned, someone had got in somehow. They had a terminal up and running, and before my very eyes somebody was typing "chroot." Of course I shut down immediately, overwrote the OS (it was BSD system). I used a heavy duty app, something like "dban" as I recall. So, when I remembered that incident, and an app was wanting me to mess with the chroot command, I got cold feet. I don't know if they got in because of Flash, or because it was a BSD system, or something else. but I have become really paranoid now about the web.

[monkeybrain20122]

Unity? Unity is dead, dead, dead. Move on. Get over it. Try fvwm.

No, it is maintained by the community, it can be easily installed with sudo apt install ubuntu-unity-desktop, switch to lightdm when prompted.
Reboot, log into unity, that's it (optionally one can remove gnome-shell)
I am using unity in 20.04. Works flawlessly, much better than the clunky mess that is gnome shell.
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/c/desktop/ubuntu-unity-dev

[O)9(yo&#]

No, it is maintained by the community, it can be easily installed with sudo apt install ubuntu-unity-desktop, switch to lightdm when prompted.
Reboot, log into unity, that's it (optionally one can remove gnome-shell)
I am using unity in 20.04. Works flawlessly, much better than the clunky mess that is gnome shell.
https://discourse.ubuntu.com/c/desktop/ubuntu-unity-dev

I'm glad to hear that it is still maintained. I too vastly prefer it to Gnome. Wasn't sure how well it worked in >Ubuntu 16 systems. I wish Xubuntu, Lubuntu and Mubuntu had 5 year support. If so I'd probably be using one of them.

[monkeybrain20122]

I'm glad to hear that it is still maintained. I too vastly prefer it to Gnome. Wasn't sure how well it worked in >Ubuntu 16 systems. I wish Xubuntu, Lubuntu and Mubuntu had 5 year support. If so I'd probably be using one of them.

Unity works flawlessly on 20.04.

[O)9(yo&#]

The only way I can get both U-16 and Lite 3.8 to boot is to have Lite be the Grub 0wner. If I have Ubuntu be the owner, Lite won't boot. not a big deal, except the Ubuntu grub is a lot prettier, with that purple color. Gotta have that purple...Oh well...

[TheFu]

The only way I can get both U-16 and Lite 3.8 to boot is to have Lite be the Grub 0wner. If I have Ubuntu be the owner, Lite won't boot. not a big deal, except the Ubuntu grub is a lot prettier, with that purple color. Gotta have that purple...Oh well...

There are other boot managers, I hear. Guys in my Linux group use one, but since I don't dual boot, I've never paid attention. In the OS/2 days, I used some thing called OS-BS, but that was to get passed the boot sector limitation that lilo had all those years ago. I think grub is still used, just to each different system, they don't know about each other.

[mIk3_08]

Unity? Unity is dead, dead, dead. .

Are sure, Why I'm still using it until now? If its dead I'm sure it won't run to my system right now but it did with no hassle running on 64 bit OS Kernel: 5.4.0

[TheFu]

Correction: Unity should be dead, dead, dead. It is an abomination. Has been since the beginning. Better?

But this is a matter of opinion.