|
taqueso posted:What does happen? Does it load X but not gnome or is it not launching X at all? Its Ubuntu 8.04. X wont load, startx gives me an error saying "x cannot stat etc x11 x no such file or directory aborting. xinit: Server Error" I used aptitude to check which x packages were install and it looks like x11-xserver-utils is install with xserver installed as a virtual(?, its listed as v) package. edit - reinstalled xserver and ran startx and got a fatal error about the font path. double checked and xorg wasnt installed. Installed that and ran start x and got a blank screen... rugbert fucked around with this message at 19:44 on May 16, 2009 |
#
?
May 16, 2009 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:19 |
|
|
I'm using Conky in Ubuntu (9.04). I have it set to run at startup, so it'll appear briefly for a few seconds, but then disappear. I have to go into terminal to run it again with conky -a top_right. Additionally, it correctly shows the CPU speed as 2000mhz, but when I open it again it shows as only 1000. And the computer generally does feel a bit slower than it should. Please keep in mind that I am a complete linux beginner, with less than a week of experience. Edit: I should really have stated a question; why is conky disappearing, and why does it think my processor is half its actual speed? Manny Calavera fucked around with this message at 23:50 on May 16, 2009 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2009 19:22
|
|
|
rugbert posted:Its Ubuntu 8.04. X wont load, startx gives me an error saying "x cannot stat etc x11 x no such file or directory aborting. xinit: Server Error"
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2009 22:23
|
|
|
mystes posted:Did you use the alternate installation cd or did you uninstall stuff? Anyway, try install the package xorg. I think it may include all the stuff you need. I did, I noticed that xorg wasnt installed and installed it but I got a blank screen. I just tried a LiveUSB to double check to see if its my PC or linux and after the Ubuntu loading screen finishes, blank screen. So I tried a different video card and same thing. Whats weird is that Ive had Ubuntu running using both of the video cards I have before. AND if hit alt-ctrl-f2 I can open the terminal and see that on the screen. Im removing xorg, xserver, and gnome desktop and will try reinstalling them. Should I install them in a specific order?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2009 22:30
|
|
|
rugbert posted:I did, I noticed that xorg wasnt installed and installed it but I got a blank screen. I just tried a LiveUSB to double check to see if its my PC or linux and after the Ubuntu loading screen finishes, blank screen. Can you log in on the console and look at /var/log/Xorg.0.log ?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2009 22:52
|
|
|
mystes posted:Oh, sorry I wasn't reading very carefully. The error messages you posted before were indicative of important stuff not being installed, but getting a just blank screen (especially after you boot from the live usb image) suggests that for some reason the default x configuration has issues on your computer. Im not seeing any errors, no (EE). I can post it somewhere if you think you could take a look tho.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 03:42
|
|
|
rugbert posted:Im not seeing any errors, no (EE). I can post it somewhere if you think you could take a look tho. Edit: Since you can't find any errors you might actually want to log in on the console and first do something like "ps -A | grep -i xorg" to see if xorg is still running. If it's not running check dmesg if you haven't already and if you still can't find any error messages I'm out of ideas. If xorg is still running my guess would be that it's running at a resolution your monitor can't handle for some reason and you could try manually configuring the settings if you really want to pretend it's the first half of the current decade or earlier. mystes fucked around with this message at 05:18 on May 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 05:08
|
|
|
Don't know if this for sure belongs here, but I don't want to make a whole thread for this... I'm trying to find a piece of software that will allow me to select multiple files/folders across multiple disks and filesystems and then copy them en masse to a network location, possibly windows -> linux or vice versa. What I am trying to do is migrate all of my music/movies to a central linux HTPC/media server, but all the files are scattered throughout my multiple PCs throughout my house, so I would like to be able to install a program to select all of the folders that I want to copy on one PC and click 'GO' to have it copy the files. Posting in the linux thread because I would like linux-compatible, GPL compliant software. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 05:17
|
|
|
livelikecode posted:Don't know if this for sure belongs here, but I don't want to make a whole thread for this...
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 12:00
|
|
|
mystes posted:You might be better off going to the ubuntu forums. Although I've dealt with this sort of thing in the past I think it's been at least four years since I've actually had X not work out the box. Nowadays that makes it such a major bug that someone should probably already know about it. Unfortunately if you don't have any error message there isn't really anything you can google but asking around somewhere with more ubuntu users is probably the simplest option. oh gently caress me. yea Im an absolute moron. I dont have a monitor so I plugged it into a huge TV. I just borrowed a monitor from someone and it worked no problem. rugbert fucked around with this message at 18:49 on May 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 16:50
|
|
|
rugbert posted:oh gently caress me. yea Im an absolute moron. I dont have a monitor so I plugged it into a huge TV. I just borrowed a monitor from someone and it worked no problem. 1) Run x using startx or just log in to xdm / gdm if you can do that without being able to see the screen. 2) Log in on the console (another console if you used startx). 3) do "export DISPLAY=:0" 4) now you can use xrandr to change the resolution like "xrandr --size 640x480". 5) At least one of the screen resolution configuration programs (that run under x; this is a lot more convenient than editing the configuration file by hand) in ubuntu should let you change the resolution permanently I think. However, now that you have another monitor temporarily you might as well lower the resolution to 640x480 so that you can conveniently adjust it with your tv. Actually, I wonder if there's some proper way to handle this in Ubuntu by forcing it to use some sort of fallback settings in a user-friendly fashion? Edit: You should probably file some sort of bug. Probably your TV has defective information on what resolutions it can handle but there might at least be some sort of blacklist that it can be added to in order to override the default settings. mystes fucked around with this message at 19:49 on May 17, 2009 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 19:44
|
|
|
I've tried finding a fix for an issue I've had with Xubuntu in other places but even after trying their fixes it still doesn't work. Maybe you guys can help. I recently put Xubuntu 9.04 on my crappy old Dell Inspiron 1100. It runs fine except for one big issue. If I let the OS load up normally I get the loading screen but when it finishes loading it brings me to a blank screen. If I go to the grub menu and select either the normal boot option or the recovery mode option the main screen comes up with no problems. I've tried changing the xorg.conf file with no luck. I also have the most recent Bios installed. Anyone have any suggestions on fixing the problem, and if you don't, is there any way to tell the OS to use recovery mode every time without me having to input anything?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 22:11
|
|
|
Terminus posted:I've tried changing the xorg.conf file with no luck.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2009 23:02
|
|
|
I eventually changed it all back to default and didn't write anything down.  Here's what's in there now though Section "Device" Identifier "Configured Video Device" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Configured Monitor" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Default Screen" Monitor "Configured Monitor" Device "Configured Video Device" EndSection Also, all grep "(EE)" /var/log/Xorg.0.log got me was "(WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown." I'm a complete nub with Linux command prompt so I'm pretty much copy pasting what you give me, BTW.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2009 03:00
|
|
|
Well, you can try using sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg but it will probably not change much if anything from what your xorg.conf currently contains. Choosing the framebuffer video option during the configuration may give you something that works, but it won't be accelerated. Which graphics chipset does your system use?
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2009 04:24
|
|
|
From the users manual: Video type - direct AGP integrated graphics Host interface - integrated direct AGP Video controller - Intel UMA integrated Video memory - 1 MB with Intel DVMT up to 32 MB (with 128 MB of system memory) or 64 MB (with 256 MB or more of system memory) LCD interface - SPWG-A
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2009 04:58
|
|
|
eh, forget it. Reinstalling.
Unacknowledged fucked around with this message at 07:11 on May 18, 2009 |
|
#
?
May 18, 2009 06:16
|
|
|
Terminus posted:From the users manual:
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2009 15:05
|
|
|
Terminus, the fact that it works fine when you go into the grub menu and select the default option is pretty crazy and I can't explain that. When you select the recovery mode, do you just cancel out and then it works? If so, does it display the graphical loading splash screen when you do this (this is really lazy of me but I don't want to reboot to find out). The splash screen causing problems is pretty much the only explanation I can think of. Since x works some of the time, I don't think it can be a problem with its configuration.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2009 00:17
|
|
|
Is the XDMCP protocol supposed to be slow as balls? The smallest task like, opening a folder takes a good 30+ seconds... is vnc faster?
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2009 02:47
|
|
|
rugbert posted:Is the XDMCP protocol supposed to be slow as balls? The smallest task like, opening a folder takes a good 30+ seconds... is vnc faster? It shouldn't be that bad. I haven't used XDMCP since using the solaris lab in college, but I remember it being very usable over a LAN. I'm not sure if VNC supposed to be faster or not, I use VNC because it is easier to connect from other platforms.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2009 21:50
|
|
|
I have been playing around with my netbook and am quite enjoying a fork of Ubuntu on it. I was curious about the possibility of video capturing from one computer to the other with the VGA-port. I haven't found anything saying that it is specifically VGA-out only, but after searching it doesn't seem that the VGA ports on laptops are ever used for anything other than outputting to a second monitor. I understand that a video card isn't a capture card, but I'm curious if anything like that is even possible. It would be quite cool to capture video output or better yet use another laptop as a second monitor. This seems like an idiotic question considering my research turns up nothing. But it might be possible! Also, is there a way to invert screen or window colors in gnome/Ubuntu without compiz?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2009 13:42
|
|
|
mystes posted:Terminus, the fact that it works fine when you go into the grub menu and select the default option is pretty crazy and I can't explain that. I tried changing menu.lst to have get rid of the splash screen, but it still had the same problem. Eventually I ended up trying out Debian due to some saying it's a little more robust in terms of supporting older systems. It seems to work well so far, although I haven't tested it that much yet.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2009 17:13
|
|
|
rugbert posted:Is the XDMCP protocol supposed to be slow as balls? The smallest task like, opening a folder takes a good 30+ seconds... is vnc faster? You can improve the situation a bit by using ssh compression when tunneling, and using a compositing window manager (which will cache draw events so there should be fewer network roundtrips). Another alternative is to use NX, which aims to significantly improve the bandwidth and response time of remote X applications. NX, when it works, is really great--desktop suspend & resume support, applications that look as if they're running locally, and works just fine over DSL. The problem is that the semi-proprietary nature of NX means it's not well supported by many Linux distributions, and so it's a bit of a hassle to install. VNC can be made to run pretty fast, but it's a much simpler (dumber) protocol, so often you have to trade speed for visual quality. In my experience, NX is both faster and better looking when it works, but VNC is much faster than regular remote X11 out of the box.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2009 19:59
|
|
|
Is there something I can install on my dedicated server that will create a youtube-like interface to a directory of videos, transcoding them on the fly to be streamed to the browser?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 03:45
|
|
|
Running Xfce under Ubuntu - is there a way to just get the gently caress out of the window manager entirely and drop to a terminal? Not just a terminal window. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 04:50
|
|
|
fletcher posted:Is there something I can install on my dedicated server that will create a youtube-like interface to a directory of videos, transcoding them on the fly to be streamed to the browser? OneSwarm? but I'm sure there's something a bit more dedicated that F2F app was inspired by to make such an interface.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 05:04
|
|
|
Same Great Paste posted:Running Xfce under Ubuntu - is there a way to just get the gently caress out of the window manager entirely and drop to a terminal? Not just a terminal window. Thanks! If you absolutely have to quit your X session, run: code:code:
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 05:18
|
|
|
Perfect - Thank you!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 05:37
|
|
|
Edit: Double Post
maskenfreiheit fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 17:48
|
|
|
Edit: doublepost
maskenfreiheit fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Mar 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2009 18:48
|
|
|
Seems like the perfect place to ask this rather simple question. I'm a Windows user who has had to format recently and am going from Vista (32bit) to Windows 7 RC (64 bit). I've been intrigued to try Linux for years, mostly just to have something extra stable to boot in to for - say - torrents and general web browsing, etc. I'd still be primarily using Windows since I primarily use my PC for gaming. So, a few questions: 1) Is this reasonable and not going to hurt my brain to make this work? I'm not technically inept by any means and am quite good at following instructions. 2) Which distro of Linux should I use? I want something that is as similar to Windows as possible just so I'm not booting into a command line. I'm more than willing to learn a command line since I grew up with DOS based PCs. 3) Is there any reason NOT to do this?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2009 21:36
|
|
|
sicarius posted:1) Is this reasonable and not going to hurt my brain to make this work? I'm not technically inept by any means and am quite good at following instructions. sicarius posted:2) Which distro of Linux should I use? I want something that is as similar to Windows as possible just so I'm not booting into a command line. I'm more than willing to learn a command line since I grew up with DOS based PCs. sicarius posted:3) Is there any reason NOT to do this? Be aware though, that linux doesn't try to be windows in any regard. Thus, just because you usually do things one way in windows doesn't mean you can do it the same way in linux. However, it's usually easy for people to migrate and learn how to work stuff, but the warning is there anyways.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2009 22:10
|
|
|
Edit: /\ /\ /\  God drat this took me a long time to type.sicarius posted:Seems like the perfect place to ask this rather simple question. I'm a Windows user who has had to format recently and am going from Vista (32bit) to Windows 7 RC (64 bit). I've been intrigued to try Linux for years, mostly just to have something extra stable to boot in to for - say - torrents and general web browsing, etc. I'd still be primarily using Windows since I primarily use my PC for gaming. 1) Yes, it's very reasonable. 2) I haven't done distro research in a long time - but a few years back at least Ubuntu was the distro that was trying to be the most user/desktop-friendly. If you want to test-drive a desktop installation of it before committing you can run http://www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/1224 with the free VMWare Player to see mostly what you'd get. 3) No. Scary-installations are in the past, and the desktop is more than usable. I just did a fresh install of Ubuntu 9.04 using the terrifying non-GUI installer and the hardest question it asked was whether or not I should let it auto-detect my keyboard layout.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2009 22:19
|
|
|
Zom Aur posted:It's pretty reasonable. You should be able to get it to work if you're apt at following instructions. Since I won't be using Linux as my primary OS and am readily able and willing to learn new stuff - I'm going to go forward with it. So, in a nutshell what are the differences between Fedora, Ubuntu and Mandriva? I have heard a lot of Ubuntu lately and am somewhat familiar with Fedora by name, but know nothing about them really. What is Mandriva?
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2009 22:36
|
|
|
sicarius posted:What is Mandriva? Formerly known as Mandrake, it was the best distro for new users in the early 2000's. Nowadays, you'll find better package support from many programs for Ubuntu and Fedora. I prefer Ubuntu, but Fedora is certainly not bad. Nowadays, it's all so simple to use that it really doesn't matter. My eee900 is running Ubuntu Netbook Remix and I couldn't be happier with it.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2009 23:29
|
|
|
So which should I install first to make this process as painless as possible? Also, would it be acceptable/functional to make some partitions of my 500gb drive - say 1 100gb partition for Windows, a 50GB partition for Linux, and the remainder for programs? After this last hit from Virut I'm wanting to segment things as much as possible.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2009 16:37
|
|
|
sicarius posted:So which should I install first to make this process as painless as possible? Install Windows first (it needs to be in the first partition for some reason), then install Linux and shrink the Windows partition down to the size you want it. Using a separate partition for /home, /, /swap is a good idea, too.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2009 18:01
|
|
|
royallthefourth posted:Install Windows first (it needs to be in the first partition for some reason), then install Linux and shrink the Windows partition down to the size you want it. Using a separate partition for /home, /, /swap is a good idea, too. What are /home, /, and /swap? I'm assuming the / is basically what I consider C:/ (the root directory) but what are /home and /swap used for? As someone who's never really dealt with partitions are there any real negative implications of using so many and is Ubuntu going to be able to deal with NTFS formatted drives?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2009 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:19 |
|
|
sicarius posted:What are /home, /, and /swap? I'm assuming the / is basically what I consider C:/ (the root directory) but what are /home and /swap used for? /swap is a dedicated partition for "virtual memory" if you can call it that. It's basically a partition to swap out memory to disk. There's always some fun debate on the size, but I just double my physical RAM when creating this partition. Unless you have multiple people using the system, there's no need to make a separate partition for /home and / My recommended partitions: /boot - 128 megs, maybe 256 megs. /swap - 2*Physical RAM / - Remaining disk. Others have their own schemes, but this works great for me.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2009 19:13
|
|
