Out of Space

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
74 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Liam Proven
On 9 August 2016 at 23:22, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It's not only the high amount of computer
> waste that is an issue, but also the exploitation of rare earths, let
> alone exploitation of humans. The fundamental attitude to need always
> the latest and greatest is a problem. Some people already consider that
> earth is not overpopulated, just the available resources are misused by
> a minority. Apart from a few exceptional tasks, there are no good
> reasons to need one new computer after the other. Most end users only
> need one new computer after the other, to run a browser on more and
> more flashy desktop environments that are badly programmed.


I strongly agree.

Both my laptops are Core 2 Duos. They are still more than fast enough
for all I need. One is from 2007, the newer from 2008. My Mac mini is
a 2011 model. All are lovely, quick, responsive machines.

OK, except in Windows... But I almost never use it.



--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: [hidden email] • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: [hidden email] • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Richard Barmann


On 08/09/2016 08:46 PM, Liam Proven wrote:

> On 9 August 2016 at 23:22, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> It's not onlyhe high amount of computer
>> waste that is an issue, but also the exploitation of rare earths, let
>> alone exploitation of humans. The fundamental attitude to need always
>> the latest and greatest is a problem. Some people already consider that
>> earth is not overpopulated, just the available resources are misused by
>> a minority. Apart from a few exceptional tasks, there are no good
>> reasons to need one new computer after the other. Most end users only
>> need one new computer after the other, to run a browser on more and
>> more flashy desktop environments that are badly programmed.
>>   I could afford
>>
>> it I would get a geru to come and fix this but It is not covered with my Social Security. 40 years as
>>
>> an Ironworker did not educate me about computers.
>
> I strongly agree.
>   I could afford
>
> it I would get a geru to come and fix this but It is not covered with my Social Security. 40 years as
>
> an Ironworker did not educate me about computers.
> Both my laptops are Core 2 Duos. They are still more than fast enough
> for all I need. One is from 2007, the newer from 2008. My Mac mini is
> a 2011 model. All are lovely, quick, responsive machines.
>
> OK, except in Windows... But I almost never use it.
>
>
> I did post one time to the other thread as I saw was Out of Space but did because
of all the technical back and forth on Out of Space. I thought I might
find an answer
that I could understand. At this point I cannot boot anything with the
error in Grub.
Below Is the last post I made with the new problem that I probably
caused. If
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I was trying to install the Ubuntu 16.04 and did the format that it
called for in the beginning of the install and now I have : error: file
'/boot/grub/i386-pc/normal.mod' not found. Entering
rescue  mode... grub rescue>
Dick

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Richard Barmann
In reply to this post by Liam Proven


On 08/09/2016 08:46 PM, Liam Proven wrote:

> On 9 August 2016 at 23:22, Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> It's not only the high amount of computer
>> waste that is an issue, but also the exploitation of rare earths, let
>> alone exploitation of humans. The fundamental attitude to need always
>> the latest and greatest is a problem. Some people already consider that
>> earth is not overpopulated, just the available resources are misused by
>> a minority. Apart from a few exceptional tasks, there are no good
>> reasons to need one new computer after the other. Most end users only
>> need one new computer after the other, to run a browser on more and
>> more flashy desktop environments that are badly programmed.
>
> I strongly agree.
>
> Both my laptops are Core 2 Duos. They are still more than fast enough
> for all I need. One is from 2007, the newer from 2008. My Mac mini is
> a 2011 model. All are lovely, quick, responsive machines.
>
> OK, except in Windows... But I almost never use it.
>
> Is there something I can open in a terminal to see what is installed where in the partitions?
I messed around and got the Grub working. Had to install the Kubuntu and it
overrode the grub abd it works. Now I have the Kubuntu working good but
in Grub I shoe Ubuntu on sdb7
and the 15.04 on sdb7, both on the 75Gb Drive. The Kubuntu is on the
160Gb drive. If it would
help to send you pctues I can attempt that that again tomorrow afternoon.
Thanks
Dick
>


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Richard Barmann
On Tue, 9 Aug 2016 21:17:34 -0400, Dick Barmann wrote:
> I did post one time to the other thread as I saw was Out of Space
> but did because of all the technical back and forth on Out of Space.
> I thought I might  find an answer that I could understand. At this
> point I cannot boot anything with the error in Grub.
>Below Is the last post I made with the new problem that I probably
>caused. If
>-----------------------------------------------------------------

Don't worry, indeed, somebody should open a third thread about system
requirements. And this thread should be only used regarding the issues
you are experiencing.

>I was trying to install the Ubuntu 16.04 and did the format that it
>called for in the beginning of the install and now I have : error:
>file '/boot/grub/i386-pc/normal.mod' not found. Entering
>rescue  mode... grub rescue>

As already pointed out, I don't know why this happens, somebody more
familiar with the install media needs to chime in.

Regards,
Ralf




--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Richard Barmann
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:07:55 -0400, Dick Barmann wrote:
>Is there something I can open in a terminal to see what is installed
>where in the partitions?  
>I messed around and got the Grub working. Had to install the Kubuntu
>and it overrode the grub abd it works. Now I have the Kubuntu working
>good but in Grub I shoe Ubuntu on sdb7
>and the 15.04 on sdb7, both on the 75Gb Drive. The Kubuntu is on the
>160Gb drive. If it would
>help to send you pctues I can attempt that that again tomorrow
>afternoon.

Around four commands are helpful for this and similar tasks:

1.

  sudo parted -l

or alternatively

  sudo fdisk -l

2.

  sudo blkid

3.

  grep root /boot/grub/grub.cfg

and/or perhaps

  grep vmlinuz /boot/grub/grub.cfg

4.

  cat /etc/fstab

based on the output of "grep root /boot/grub/grub.cfg"
it could be useful to find were /etc/fstab of other installs is located
and then to take a look at those, too.

Regards,
Ralf


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Oliver Grawert
In reply to this post by Ralf Mardorf-2
hi,
Am Dienstag, den 09.08.2016, 23:22 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> On Tue, 09 Aug 2016 22:33:21 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
> >
> > well, i tend to replace my workstation about every 4-5 years,
> > though i
> > professionally use it and earn my money doing development on it
> Hi,
>
> it doesn't matter if a computer is used for development or by an
> end user. 

well, i beg to disagree ...
https://launchpad.net/~ricotz/+archive/ubuntu/red/+build/10539905
(see the "Finished" line)

it makes quite some difference if your system is powerful enough to
build something like firefox or libreoffice in 1-2h less when you need
to verify a bugfix locally and colleagues are possibly waiting for you
as well ;)

...or if local your test iso build is done in 1.5h or just in 20min
when you work on the installer and can only test it from a fresh iso
... 

having good hardware can make a significant difference in your work
speed (and thus in costs) when doing development ... 

ask a craftsman if he uses tools from the next home-improvement center
or if he prefers professional parts in his toolbox instead (a good
craftsman can surely also work with the cheap stuff but has to be more
careful the tools wont be as precise etc). a developer machine is a
tool and its quality can have a significant impact on costs and time...

ciao
        oli
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Oliver Grawert
In reply to this post by Oliver Grawert
hi,
Am Dienstag, den 09.08.2016, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Oliver Grawert:
> hi,
> On Di, 2016-08-09 at 20:14 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
...

oh, and who brought up that myth that the BIOS would have anything to
do with being able to GPT boot or not? 

it definitely has not ... thats a bootloader thing ...

ciao
        oli
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Paul Smith-2
In reply to this post by Ralf Mardorf-2
On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 00:00 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> The way computers, whiteware, entertainment gear is wasted nowadays
> can't continue that much longer. The reason that "rare earth elements"
> are named _rare_ earth elements, is that they are _rare_. One
> day they need to be completely recycled and part of a recycling process
> is repairing and keeping old hardware as well as writing software for
> "old" hardware. Consuming the way a minority of humans, those from the
> rich countries, is doing it now, could only continue a few decades, if
> at all. If you don't have children and assuming you only care about
> yourself, you could continue, if not, consider to think over this
> attitude. 

Here you are saying people should not buy new systems just because they
want "the new hotness", but rather stick with systems they have that
are sufficient to their needs.  I have no argument with that.  As I
said my CPU is 8 years old and I have no particular plans to upgrade
it, and I do software development for a living and do a lot of
compiling (of complex C++ code, which needs a lot of CPU).

But earlier you said that developers and distributions shouldn't be
relying on "the latest and greatest" hardware, giving SSE3 as an
example.  I take exception to the idea that SSE3 should be considered
"latest and greatest".

SSE3 is a squarely mainstream technology and it's completely reasonable
to expect it to be present on a normal system today.  Anyone running a
system which doesn't have SSE3 is out of the mainstream and presumably
knows it, and should be using an appropriate Linux distribution to
support it.

My older system has no problem running modern distros and desktop
environments (anyway, GNOME3 which is what I use; not sure about
Unity/KDE/etc.)  I disagree with the accusation that Linux distros and
developers don't care about anything but the latest and greatest
hardware and won't run on anything less; IMO that's neither fair nor
accurate.

But that's all I have to say about this topic; I don't think this is
the right forum to discuss the problems of first-world excesses.

Cheers!

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Gene Heskett-2
In reply to this post by Oliver Grawert
On Wednesday 10 August 2016 07:02:49 Oliver Grawert wrote:

> hi,
>
> Am Dienstag, den 09.08.2016, 22:33 +0200 schrieb Oliver Grawert:
> > hi,
> > On Di, 2016-08-09 at 20:14 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> ...
>
> oh, and who brought up that myth that the BIOS would have anything to
> do with being able to GPT boot or not? 
>
> it definitely has not ... thats a bootloader thing ...
>
> ciao
> oli

Oli, I think that needs an explanation.

As the first point I''l raise my hand & wave madly on mention of, it IS
the bios that starts the boot loader, presumably from whatever passes as
the agreed on starting sector we usually call the MBR, and its name is
not germain to the discussion other than serving as the anchoring
starting point in the boot process.  It (the bios) doesn't ever need to
accessed again (except in a UEFI environment with  GPT partitioned disk)
but it must be done.

So please shine a light in that crevice holding the secret sauce that
makes all this work.

I am sure I am not the only one with a visible curiosity bump, :)
 
Thanks.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Liam Proven
On 10 August 2016 at 19:05, Gene Heskett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Oli, I think that needs an explanation.
>
> As the first point I''l raise my hand & wave madly on mention of, it IS
> the bios that starts the boot loader, presumably from whatever passes as
> the agreed on starting sector we usually call the MBR, and its name is
> not germain to the discussion other than serving as the anchoring
> starting point in the boot process.  It (the bios) doesn't ever need to
> accessed again (except in a UEFI environment with  GPT partitioned disk)
> but it must be done.
>
> So please shine a light in that crevice holding the secret sauce that
> makes all this work.
>
> I am sure I am not the only one with a visible curiosity bump, :)


My understanding is this...

The "classic" original PC boot process, at least from the AT onwards, was:

At power on, the BIOS is in the memory map at the point where the CPU
starts executing code.

The code in the BIOS does a self-test, then it looks for the drives
listed in the CMOS settings.

It goes to the bootable drive, usually either the first floppy or the
first hard disk. It reads the first sector into memory and runs it.
This is the "boot block". This contains code to do one of 2 things.
OK, 3 things.

#1 Display a little message saying that this disk isn't bootable.

#2 Locate the first partition, then load and run what is in _its_ boot block.

#3 -- not originally planned -- load a virus into memory. ;-)

No. 1 is the reason why a disk formatted on DOS or Windows in a
non-English language may display a non-English message on your PC
saying something like "non-system disk or disk error" in German or
whatever.

What LILO and GRUB do is embed a bit of code into spare space in the
boot block to intercept and redirect this behaviour. Instead, they
load the _rest_ of their own code from your Linux root partition, and
then it displays a boot menu, offering a choice of OSes -- or just
boot the default OS.

LILO and GRUB (or SysLinux for removable media) let your PC boot
non-DOS OSes that the BIOS was never intended to run.

For a long time, the Linux kernel contained its own floppy bootloader
in the first 1K or so of code, so if you just DDed the kernel onto a
floppy, and booted that floppy, it would load the kernel, then ask for
a root diskette.

Now the kernel won't fit on a floppy, and that code was removed long ago.

DOS has its bootloader in IBMBIOS.COM or a similarly-named
hidden/system/read-only file.

NT has it in a file called NTLDR.

OS/2 has one too, whose name I forget.

Those are the "official" OSes that work with the BIOS. The rest --
BSD, Netware 2, whatever -- have to roll their own.


--
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: [hidden email] • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: [hidden email] • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Ralf Mardorf-2
In reply to this post by Paul Smith-2
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 11:21:37 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
>I disagree with the accusation that Linux distros and developers don't
>care about anything but the latest and greatest hardware and won't run
>on anything less; IMO that's neither fair nor accurate.

I never claimed that. I run tailored installs, Arch is always a
tailored install, but I even set up my Ubuntu this way, e.g. using
openbox, while actually KDE wouldn't cause issues either, it just not
to my taste. I could say a lot regarding GNOME and GTK3 and underpin
this and provide examples, were developers of other projects fixed the
same issues for their projects, the GNOME developers are not willing to
fix. However, I've got no interest to continue this thread. So in
short, I didn't made this generalisation.

Regards,
Ralf

--
Death of ROXTerm
https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/discussion/422638/thread/60da6975/


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Oliver Grawert
In reply to this post by Gene Heskett-2
hi,
On Mi, 2016-08-10 at 13:05 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> On Wednesday 10 August 2016 07:02:49 Oliver Grawert wrote:

> > it definitely has not ... thats a bootloader thing ...
> >
> > ciao
> > oli
>
> Oli, I think that needs an explanation.
> ...
>
> So please shine a light in that crevice holding the secret sauce
> that 
> makes all this work.
>
> I am sure I am not the only one with a visible curiosity bump, :)
>  
well, the point here is that the BIOS never actually accesses your
partition table (no matter what kind of partition table that is) 

let us take a look at the MBR and the boot process a BIOS does:

wether you use MSDOS or GPT, the following is identical for both:

a disk has an MBR that is 512 bytes big and can contain the first stage
bootloader starting at byte 0 of your disk (usually with grub that is
the "stage1" binary blob) and ending at byte 440 ... your BIOS will
look if it finds a bootloader signature in the first bytes of the HDD
... and fire it up in case it finds the desired byte signature ... 

so now you are in your bootloader, past the BIOS...

lets take a look at the rest of these 512 bytes of the MBR:

in case of an MSDOS partition table you have 4 entries each 16 bytes
big starting at byte 446 ... each of these 16byte blocks is an entry
for a possible primary (or extended) partition ...

in case of a GPT partition table your partiton table actually starts in
the first logical block *after* the 512 bytes the MBR occupies, the
byte 446 to 510 block that normally holds the MSDOS table is actually
just marking the disk as "occupied" so that the disk cant be trashed if
you use a non GPT partitioning tool on it (you can easily try it by
running something like fdisk on a system with GPT). along with that
there is always a safety copy of your GPT at the very end of the disk.

in either case, the BIOS only looks at the MBR and is not dealing with
the partition table at all, your bootloader (and later in the boot the
kernel) does that.

that said ... if you use a dual boot with windows it will only boot
from a GPT disk when there is UEFI ... the same thing is true if you
use secure boot, there GPT and UEFI are tied together. so in both of
these cases the claim that you need UEFI for GPT is true.

but if you have a plain linux only machine it does not matter if you
use UEFI or BIOS, you can defintely use a GPT instead of an MSDOS
partiton table even with a BIOS based machine (at least when using a
bootloader that can understand GPT like grub2).

ciao
        oli

 
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

signature.asc (188 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Ralf Mardorf-2
On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 20:03:40 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
>but if you have a plain linux only machine it does not matter if you
>use UEFI or BIOS, you can defintely use a GPT instead of an MSDOS
>partiton table even with a BIOS based machine (at least when using a
>bootloader that can understand GPT like grub2).

That's good to know.

IIRC Gene OTOH had issues with MBR and a kernel, resp. /boot
partition, that was addressed to far away, that's why he disagreed with
my claim, that /boot not necessarily needs a separated partition, but
instead /boot should get it's own partition and it always should be the
first partition.

--
Death of ROXTerm
https://sourceforge.net/p/roxterm/discussion/422638/thread/60da6975/


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Out of Space

Gene Heskett-2
In reply to this post by Oliver Grawert
On Wednesday 10 August 2016 14:03:40 Oliver Grawert wrote:

> hi,
>
> On Mi, 2016-08-10 at 13:05 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Wednesday 10 August 2016 07:02:49 Oliver Grawert wrote:
> > 
> >
> > > it definitely has not ... thats a bootloader thing ...
> > >
> > > ciao
> > > oli
> >
> > Oli, I think that needs an explanation.
> > ...
> >
> > So please shine a light in that crevice holding the secret sauce
> > that 
> > makes all this work.
> >
> > I am sure I am not the only one with a visible curiosity bump, :)
> >  
>
> well, the point here is that the BIOS never actually accesses your
> partition table (no matter what kind of partition table that is) 
>
> let us take a look at the MBR and the boot process a BIOS does:
>
> wether you use MSDOS or GPT, the following is identical for both:
>
> a disk has an MBR that is 512 bytes big and can contain the first
> stage bootloader starting at byte 0 of your disk (usually with grub
> that is the "stage1" binary blob) and ending at byte 440 ... your BIOS
> will look if it finds a bootloader signature in the first bytes of the
> HDD ... and fire it up in case it finds the desired byte signature ...
>
> so now you are in your bootloader, past the BIOS...
>
> lets take a look at the rest of these 512 bytes of the MBR:
>
> in case of an MSDOS partition table you have 4 entries each 16 bytes
> big starting at byte 446 ... each of these 16byte blocks is an entry
> for a possible primary (or extended) partition ...
>
> in case of a GPT partition table your partiton table actually starts
> in the first logical block *after* the 512 bytes the MBR occupies, the
> byte 446 to 510 block that normally holds the MSDOS table is actually
> just marking the disk as "occupied" so that the disk cant be trashed
> if you use a non GPT partitioning tool on it (you can easily try it by
> running something like fdisk on a system with GPT). along with that
> there is always a safety copy of your GPT at the very end of the disk.
>
> in either case, the BIOS only looks at the MBR and is not dealing with
> the partition table at all, your bootloader (and later in the boot the
> kernel) does that.
>
> that said ... if you use a dual boot with windows it will only boot
> from a GPT disk when there is UEFI ... the same thing is true if you
> use secure boot, there GPT and UEFI are tied together. so in both of
> these cases the claim that you need UEFI for GPT is true.
>
> but if you have a plain linux only machine it does not matter if you
> use UEFI or BIOS, you can defintely use a GPT instead of an MSDOS
> partiton table even with a BIOS based machine (at least when using a
> bootloader that can understand GPT like grub2).
>
> ciao
> oli
>
Thank you Oli.  So before I try the live boot again, I'll change that
disk to a GPT disk first though.


>  


Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
1234