Ubuntu?

[Seekermeister]

I just got my copies of Ubuntu x64 and x32, and I'm trying to decide which to use. Is it like SuSe, where it doesn't like software raid? I'm trying to decide whether to install it on the raid drives or an IDE drive...if on the IDE, is there any point in installing the x64?

 

[stars]

I'd go with the 32 bit. You could always boot from both and use it "live" and see which you prefer.

 

[Seekermeister]

I was looking to see if there is a live CD, but none which specifically say so. Is the 32bit both live and regular installation?

EDIT: Rereading you said "both", does that mean that either version operates as a live CD?

 

[thehstrybean]

The regular Ubuntu download is a live CD, but once in it, you can install with a GUI

 

[Seekermeister]

Thanks, I did what I should have done at the start, and read the instructions on the CD sleeve. I went ahead and ran it as a live CD, but I couldn't find the dialup connection or my modem. I imagine that like before, I need to do some more reading, but when I found KPPP, it said something about it already being bundled with other apps. Thinking that this might mean that it would automatically connect when I opened Firefox, I tried, but no go. I started looking for something like YaST, so that I could configure the modem, but I couldn't find that either. It doesn't seem to see my external modem.

 

[DasFox]

If you have a 64bit CPU you use the 64bit support in the kernel, thus using Ubuntu x64. This isn't Windows we're talking here. Do you understand the 64 bit support at the kernel level and applications?

Now the Ubuntu DEV team should of compiled all the applications for it with 64 bit support as well, as long as the code for that software supported 64bit.

Again this isn't Windows, so if you want better performance from your box then use the Ubuntu x64 kernel.

ALOHA

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: DasFox
If you have a 64bit CPU you use the 64bit support in the kernel, thus using Ubuntu x64. This isn't Windows we're talking here. Do you understand the 64 bit support at the kernel level and applications?

Now the Ubuntu DEV team should of compiled all the applications for it with 64 bit support as well, as long as the code for that software supported 64bit.

Again this isn't Windows, so if you want better performance from your box then use the Ubuntu x64 kernel.

ALOHA

Except that there isn't 64 bit support for a few things still, which is why some people still use 32 bit operating systems on their 64 bit processor.

 

[DasFox]

silverpig, hehe I just said that ---> as long as the code for that software supported 64bit.

But it still helps Linux at the kernel level run better, even if there are many applications not coded for 64x

ALOHA

 

[Nothinman]

Is it like SuSe, where it doesn't like software raid?

What kind of software RAID? If you mean Windows software RAID, it'll probably be a long time before any Linux distribution can do more than pick them out of a crowd. If you mean the cheapo onboard RAID stuff then it's possible to use them but not really recommended, Linux software RAID is usually faster, more reliable and more capable.

It doesn't seem to see my external modem.

If it really is an external modem you should just point it to the correct serial port, COM1 = /dev/ttyS0, COM2 = /dev/ttyS1 and so on.

Except that there isn't 64 bit support for a few things still, which is why some people still use 32 bit operating systems on their 64 bit processor.

I've been using 64-bit Debian sid for a while now and have yet to run into anything besides flash that didn't work out of the box. Supposedly O doesn't compile on 64-bit systems yet, but O is a piece of crap anyway and I'd rather user AbiWord, Gnumeric, etc.

 

[Seekermeister]

Originally posted by: DasFox
If you have a 64bit CPU you use the 64bit support in the kernel, thus using Ubuntu x64. This isn't Windows we're talking here. Do you understand the 64 bit support at the kernel level and applications?

I understand the difference between x32 and x64 in the broad fashion. I suspect that I understand how that applies to the kernel and the applications also, but I would not swear to it. However, rather than going into a deep discussion about it now, all that I need to know is what would effect my choice of installation now.

Now the Ubuntu DEV team should of compiled all the applications for it with 64 bit support as well, as long as the code for that software supported 64bit.

Again this isn't Windows, so if you want better performance from your box then use the Ubuntu x64 kernel.

ALOHA

x64 it shall be then, thanks.

 

[Seekermeister]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
What kind of software RAID? If you mean Windows software RAID, it'll probably be a long time before any Linux distribution can do more than pick them out of a crowd. If you mean the cheapo onboard RAID stuff then it's possible to use them but not really recommended, Linux software RAID is usually faster, more reliable and more capable.

The only kind of raid that I know of that I have is the "cheapo" sort that you referred to. I do remember something about SuSe having some raid options builtin, but in the last version that I have, they made so much noise about not using the motherboard's raid, that I skipped over it entirely. If I use the raid options while partitioning with Linux (whatever flavor), does that have anything to do with the motherboard's raid?

If it really is an external modem you should just point it to the correct serial port, COM1 = /dev/ttyS0, COM2 = /dev/ttyS1 and so on

It is somewhat amusing that you would question whether it is actually an external modem, when I just said that it is. But, be that as it may, my problem is not knowing how to configure it, but where to do so. The layout seems so different from SuSe, I feel lost.

 

[Seekermeister]

I finally found where to configure the modem, so that is no longer a question. But, there is one thing that I want to ask...I think that I already know the answer, but here it is anyway: The instructions for installing Ubuntu says that if the default installation is used, that it will erase everything. Obviously, I don't want to do that, so I will not use the default. My concern is exactly how trustworthy the installation is otherwise? I'm accustomed to doing a manual installation with Mandrake or SuSe, and feel comfortable with it. Will manually installing Ubuntu be similar?

 

[TonyRic]

Originally posted by: Seekermeister
I finally found where to configure the modem, so that is no longer a question. But, there is one thing that I want to ask...I think that I already know the answer, but here it is anyway: The instructions for installing Ubuntu says that if the default installation is used, that it will erase everything. Obviously, I don't want to do that, so I will not use the default. My concern is exactly how trustworthy the installation is otherwise? I'm accustomed to doing a manual installation with Mandrake or SuSe, and feel comfortable with it. Will manually installing Ubuntu be similar?

Different installer (of course) but the end result is similar. You will be able to shrink (if necessary) the existing partitions and create the new partitions for linux that you will require. Then the installer will proceed to install the default applications. However, where it will part from MDK or SuSE is you will not have a choice as to what is installed to your system. What gets installed by default is everything on the Live CD. After the installation and boot into the installed system, you can install what you want using synaptic (the Debian software installer for Gnome).

I am assuming you have Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy), since you haven't specified which version you received. If so, check out this page: http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Edgy

 

[Seekermeister]

No, when I ordered Unbuntu, I hadn't heard anything about Edgy, so what I have is Dapper Drake...6.06 LTS.

 

[TonyRic]

OK, so problem then, use this one: http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu_dapper

 

[Nothinman]

If I use the raid options while partitioning with Linux (whatever flavor), does that have anything to do with the motherboard's raid?

No, it'll use Linux software RAID if you set it up during the installer.

 

[Seekermeister]

Originally posted by: TonyRic
OK, so problem then, use this one: http://ubuntuguide.org/wiki/Ubuntu_dapper

Thanks. That's a link that I'll be putting to good use.

 

[Seekermeister]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

If I use the raid options while partitioning with Linux (whatever flavor), does that have anything to do with the motherboard's raid?

No, it'll use Linux software RAID if you set it up during the installer.

Okay, but that leaves one more item that I'm confused about. If I use Linux raid, does it have to be on two separate harddrives, or would it work on two partitions of the same drive? Obviously, there would be no use setting a raid 1 configuration in this fashion, but would raid 0 work? I'm just trying to plan the layout of my multiboot in the best fashion. My current raid 1 SATAs will be fully occupied with XP x64 and MCE. If Linux raid is like regular raid, it would require two harddrives of equal size, and that is not something that I have with the PATA drives, and since my archives are on one of these, I certainly do not want to lose them.

 

[Nothinman]

If I use Linux raid, does it have to be on two separate harddrives, or would it work on two partitions of the same drive? Obviously, there would be no use setting a raid 1 configuration in this fashion, but would raid 0 work?

It would work but it would be pointless and hurt performance.

 

[Seekermeister]

Then I guess that I will skip Linux raid all together.

 

[pkme2]

Good decision. Enjoy your Ubuntu 32bit. I use it.

 

[Seekermeister]

Originally posted by: pkme2
Good decision. Enjoy your Ubuntu 32bit. I use it.

Thanks, but when you say Ubuntu 32bit, are you disagreeing with silverpig and DasFox about not using 64bit?

 

[Seekermeister]

One last question (I think), if properly installed, will Ubuntu's bootloader automatically pickup my other Windows and Linux OSs, or will I have to edit the menu.lst myself? Will it replace SuSe's Grub with it's own, or leave SuSe's? I guess that's two questions.

 

[TonyRic]

it will automatically pick them all up. Or at least, it should and has for me flawlessly in the past.

EDIT: I just reread your post. You will want to install the ubuntu bootloader to the partition, not the MBR in case you want to delete it. Otherwise it will remove the Suse bootloader. It will however make an entry for Suse. If you install to the partition, you will need to boot into Suse and chainload to Unbuntu within the suse bootloader. Your choice, but I would recommend installing to the partition and chainloading from Suse.

 

[Seekermeister]

The thing that confuses me, is that when I installed SuSe, I used the option "not to touch the MBR", but SuSe's Grub is the first thing to appear after the boot screens, so I'm not sure what it has done. I really don't care if I use SuSe's Grub or Ubuntu's, so long as it works properly. But, I'm going to have to delay installing Ubuntu, until my new processor arrives and I install MCE, so that all of the ducks are in a row.