The Lucid Lynx Thread

[hawker]

flarkit this may help you!

 

[Other Pineapple Smurf]

Thing is for me on not making the 10.04 move for my wifes PC are due to the fact that I need to spend anything from R400 (for 2GB of DDR2) to R1400 (2GB, NVidia Graphics Card, SATA Drive) to make this an upgrade from her existing config (7.10, 3800+ Sempron, 1GB RAM, IDEm AGP graphics).

Considering that this Celeron has an XP Pro lisense (not OEM, full retail), I could just as well install Windows XP on there again ... whats the chance.

But, I will be giving 10.04 another review later this week when I upgrade my work PC to 10.04. I will be locking my dev box onto this distro till 12.04 as I'm tired of upgrading. I do believe that for my dev box 10.04 is worth it. Also our office runs Ubuntu on our servers.

 

[BigAl-sa]

Other than the problem I mentioned earlier, and rather slow boot times, my netbook is pretty stable, but does seem to be chewing up the battery faster than 9.10.

The Kubuntu upgrade on my desktop was the smoothest upgrade I've had yet, with nothing I could see not functioning - even Firestarter was still alive. It does look as though downloading the alternate CD was a waste of bandwidth as the installer fetched over 400MB of stuffies from the repository (Thank goodness for my MyBB WA special ) I'll look at it more closely tomorrow then maybe upgrade the missus later in the week.

 

[kingrob]

Just dont be connected to the internet when installing Ubuntu 10.04!

When I installed the RC in a Virtual Box on my work pc, the installer went to fetch a huge amount of files. Next time I'm unplugging my network cable.

But it does run like a dream, haven't had any issues when using a network connection. Different when using wireless.

 

[Waaib]

For me so far .... It seems to be a bit slower when it boots and when I open programs. Once open they run fine. I have Dell D620 with Intel Graphics card and everything worked with no setup required after install.

 

[flarkit]

flarkit this may help you!

Thanks, I might give that a whirl again. I tried doing something similar when going to 9.10 and had a bit of hassle moving my /home contents across, with the old config folders.

Just dont be connected to the internet when installing Ubuntu 10.04!

That's true for upgrading, since a clean installation would require some online acccess, I'd think. If only someone had made this public knowledge before we all started upgrading!

 

[BigAl-sa]

Just dont be connected to the internet when installing Ubuntu 10.04!

That's true for upgrading, since a clean installation would require some online acccess, I'd think. If only someone had made this public knowledge before we all started upgrading!

Just remember if you use bits and pieces from other distros (like Ubuntu stuffies in Kubuntu) you do need a network connection otherwise you could end up with a broken upgrade. Also, as far as I've been able find out, the OEM video drivers are not on the alternate CDs, so you will lose your 3D capability if
you don't use a network connection.

 

[flarkit]

Just remember if you use bits and pieces from other distros (like Ubuntu stuffies in Kubuntu) you do need a network connection otherwise you could end up with a broken upgrade. Also, as far as I've been able find out, the OEM video drivers are not on the alternate CDs, so you will lose your 3D capability if
you don't use a network connection.

Quite possibly. My 3D's working fine on nvidia, so I'm mostly concerned with sound issues after the upgrade, and the strange graphics in the Alt shells.

 

[BigAl-sa]

I've just found that

/etc/init.d/samba

no longer exists. You now have to use

sudo service smbd stop
sudo service smbd start

to do

/etc/init.d/samba restart

 

[Asha'man X]

I saw that the service command started to show up in Ubuntu Server 9.10, which I liked because I am used to it from Red Hat and Mandriva. Typing out the whole /etc/init.d line never made sense to me. I do agree that in Samba's case the service command is unwieldly though.

 

[Other Pineapple Smurf]

Installed 10.04 on my work PC - was a new install (except for /home) and must say that this was the easiest and quickest install so far. Except for crap font rendering that was resolved with Nvidia drivers, I had no issues.

Did not even feel like I upgraded. My required packages where all there and unbroken.

I've just installed another 1GB of RAM into my wifes PC tonight and tempted to try UBUNTU again ... but I'm still sticking with Arch on my main rig.

 

[milomak]

I think you made the correct decision to go with Arch in this case

You have to accept that the minimum hardware requirements for the mainstream distros (fedora, suse & ubuntu - not trying to start a war here ) despite some ridiculous claims on their home sites, are dual processor, 1 GB memory & 40GB disk(7200rpm) for adequate performance. Lets face it, Windows 7 has also left a lot of 3 year old systems behind as well.

I think trying to run any current version of these distros (unless it is designed to be lightweight) on anything less diminishes the Linux experience and leads to Linux being denigrated by noobs.

OT, another pet peeve is the people who toast Windows on their laptops and then slate Linux when they can't make it work instead

you seem to misunderstand how linux works. all a distro is, is packaging of the available software at the time in a certain way. why do you assume that because he is running arch he is not running similar versions as compared to to the latest ubuntu?

 

[MickZA]

you seem to misunderstand how linux works. all a distro is, is packaging of the available software at the time in a certain way. why do you assume that because he is running arch he is not running similar versions as compared to to the latest ubuntu?

Sorry, I don't understand your point - from one of my comments in this thread http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-distributions-5/best-linux-distro-for-a-not-fast-machine-628622/page2.html

I've got a dual boot Ubuntu 7.04 / XP sp2 running on a desktop P3 500Mhz 256Mb memory in the demo room which impresses the hell out of clients and me.

The point I was trying to make here was that just because in the above example the P3 ran 7.04 acceptably and could compete with Win XP SP2 I would not attempt to run 10.4 on it and make the same comparison; but a noob might and then condemn Linux as a whole (I certainly don't regard cbrunsdonza as a noob ).

In this case cbrunsdonza recognised the limitations of the hardware and installed Arch Linux instead which gave acceptable performance as opposed to condemning 10.4.

Nowhere did I assume that an "old" version of Arch was used, in fact Arch does not use "release versions" - install Arch from a 2008 .iso and it will be updated to current supported versions by its package manager.

Mainstream desktop Linux has to compete with Windows 7 in all its versions including Ultimate which usually comes pre-installed on suitable systems (minimum of dual processor, 1 GB memory & 40GB disk (7200rpm) - get my drift now?). Why compromise Linux performance by installing it on anything less for the purpose of comparison?

BTW it's interesting to note that the current Fedora 13 Live Beta is a DVD which they say will be trimmed to CD size before release doubtless loosing some installation driver support. I think it's time for the distros to offer both Live CD & DVD versions. Put as much as they can on the DVD to minimise post-install downloading and offer as much driver support as possible to compete with the Windows 7 DVD install experience.

 

[Other Pineapple Smurf]

On the performance of 10.04 vs Arch on my wifes PC: I reinstalled 10.04 last night after upgrading her RAM to 1,5GB from 512MB. Now considering that there where no new updates since my previous attempt.

With the added RAM the Ubuntu was performing like it should, just as good as Arch. Her spreadsheets where working fine again. After monitoring the RAM usage, I found that 10.04 requires at least 1GB RAM to play niece.

I must say that I'm now pleased with Ubuntu10.04 on her machine and decided not to rollback to Arch for one simple reason: Should anything happen to her PC and I'm unavailable to help her, we have a better chance of finding an Ubuntu techie than an Arch techie - there is enough difference between the two to make a difference here.

 

[kingrob]

Ubuntu 10.04 rocks!! Love the music store, just a pity I can't find any Faithless or Black Eyed Peas on there.

Now Valve must just get the Linux Steam portal up and running, then I can play Half-Life 3 at full tilt on 10.04!

Well done to Mark and the team!

 

[hawker]

Haven't looked at the music store yet...

*goes to look*

 

[ironstone]

finally go hold of a Lucid 32-bit cd and did a clean install (dual boot on an XP drive). smooth sailing re that.

3G/HSDPA e220 with Vodacom giving me grief though. not able to maintain connection.
set it up using std ubuntu 'mobile broadband' defaults (not betavine).
seemed to be disrupted by certain events - like mounting an NTFS drive or trying to download codes when prompted (rhythmbox).

switched back to mandriva, and no such issues... so discounting a vodacom / modem issue.

any similar experiences, or advice ?

 

[ironstone]

switched back to mandriva, and no such issues... so discounting a vodacom / modem issue.

later to win7 and experienced the same, a time or two... so maybe not lucid. will try another (stable) day.

 

[pkid]

finally go hold of a Lucid 32-bit cd and did a clean install (dual boot on an XP drive). smooth sailing re that.

3G/HSDPA e220 with Vodacom giving me grief though. not able to maintain connection.
set it up using std ubuntu 'mobile broadband' defaults (not betavine).
seemed to be disrupted by certain events - like mounting an NTFS drive or trying to download codes when prompted (rhythmbox).

switched back to mandriva, and no such issues... so discounting a vodacom / modem issue.

any similar experiences, or advice ?

I had similar issue in 9.10 with the E220. I have the K3715 now and it works flawlessly in 10.04. I was connected for 6 hours the other day with no issues. Must be an issue with the E220. Bit worrying that they haven't fixed it in 6 months. Have you logged a bug on Launchpad?

 

[Smiley_lauf]

There is a known issue with broadband modems (3G/HSDPA) in Lucid--the ubuntuforums are buzzing with this.