How stable 12.1 really is? - Slackware

This is a discussion on How stable 12.1 really is? - Slackware ; On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:36:56 +0100, Peter Chant wrote: > Mark Madsen wrote: > >> Slackware includes Smart Boot Manager, mainly as a way of creating a >> boot floppy to boot from CD on systems that won't boot ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 47 of 47

Thread: How stable 12.1 really is?

  1. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    On Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:36:56 +0100, Peter Chant wrote:

    > Mark Madsen wrote:
    >
    >> Slackware includes Smart Boot Manager, mainly as a way of creating a
    >> boot floppy to boot from CD on systems that won't boot from CD by
    >> themselves.
    >>

    > Can't seem to find it on 12.1!


    Helmut has pointed it out in its hiding place in extra :-)

    It also has a sourceforge project page which Gooooooogle will find.

    >> But you can install it to the MBR of your hard disk as well.
    >>
    >> Advantage is that with ^I it will scan for boot records, so you don't
    >> need to change its setup even when you repartition the disk.
    >>

    > I'll have to look into this. Actually less of an issue with this
    > machine as its my main linux machine and runs only slack. However, for
    > the other machine which has XP and about five linux distros on it it may
    > be the route to sanity!


    That's highly likely. I once had an experimental machine with 3 primary
    partitions (linux swap, FreeBSD, NetBSD) and an extended partition
    containing about 20 partitions of 5 GB each. With SBM in the MBR I could
    boot any of the dozen or so distros I had installed with ease.

    The really nice part is that when the occasional badly behaved distro
    hosed the MBR so that only that distro would boot, I could just re-
    install SBM to the MBR in a minute or two, with no need to reconstruct a
    Grub or Lilo configuration.

    I guess I count as a fan. There's no "fans of Smart Boot Manager group
    on Facebook, maybe I'll have to create it :-)

  2. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    Dave Uhring wrote:


    >
    > 2. OK, I'll compile a new pan binary to solve the problem. But the
    > compile fails, something I have never had happen. Is gcc-4.2.3 broken? I
    > don't know but I do know that building pan from the slackbuild downloaded
    > from slackware.mirrors.tds.net fails as does the usual ./configure, make,
    > make install routine.



    No Problem with 12.1 here either. I even compiled pan 0.14.2.91 which came
    with Slackware 10.2 (just liked that old version better), no problem and it
    has taken all the abuse so far.

  3. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:27:33 -0500, SUPERDAEMON wrote:
    > Dave Uhring wrote:


    >> 2. OK, I'll compile a new pan binary to solve the problem. But the
    >> compile fails, something I have never had happen. Is gcc-4.2.3 broken? I
    >> don't know but I do know that building pan from the slackbuild downloaded
    >> from slackware.mirrors.tds.net fails as does the usual ./configure, make,
    >> make install routine.


    > No Problem with 12.1 here either. I even compiled pan 0.14.2.91 which came
    > with Slackware 10.2 (just liked that old version better), no problem and it
    > has taken all the abuse so far.


    I reinstalled 12.1 and pan compiled OK. But I still couldn't get the
    Arial font to render until I compiled a new freetype2 lib and fontconfig,
    then removed the damn Liberation fonts.


  4. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    Mark Madsen wrote:

    >
    > Helmut has pointed it out in its hiding place in extra :-)
    >
    > It also has a sourceforge project page which Gooooooogle will find.


    Don't worry, found it both ways.


    >> I'll have to look into this. Actually less of an issue with this
    >> machine as its my main linux machine and runs only slack. However, for
    >> the other machine which has XP and about five linux distros on it it may
    >> be the route to sanity!

    >
    > That's highly likely. I once had an experimental machine with 3 primary
    > partitions (linux swap, FreeBSD, NetBSD) and an extended partition
    > containing about 20 partitions of 5 GB each. With SBM in the MBR I could
    > boot any of the dozen or so distros I had installed with ease.
    >
    > The really nice part is that when the occasional badly behaved distro
    > hosed the MBR so that only that distro would boot, I could just re-
    > install SBM to the MBR in a minute or two, with no need to reconstruct a
    > Grub or Lilo configuration.
    >


    Yes. The problem I see with either lilo or grub on the MBR is that the
    contents of the MBR are tied to a config in one of the partitions
    containing a distro - you wipe that disto it gets interesting. With lilo
    you've lost the config including the kernel and initrd you used (if any)
    unless you were very carful. I do wonder what happens with grub as you
    would loose the files needed for stage 2. However, I do note that grub has
    a form of console which lets you do a few things - I suspect it would ask
    if it could not find the requisite files.


    > I guess I count as a fan. There's no "fans of Smart Boot Manager group
    > on Facebook, maybe I'll have to create it :-)


    No played with facebook.

    One thing with Smart boot manager - even in the friendliest mode I suspect
    it would confuse the non-expert user - however those people are unlikely to
    be multibooting so its probally not an issue.

    --
    http://www.petezilla.co.uk

  5. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    Peter Chant wrote:
    >
    > containing a distro - you wipe that disto it gets interesting. With lilo
    > you've lost the config including the kernel and initrd you used (if any)
    > unless you were very carful. I do wonder what happens with grub as you


    For Lilo, isn't the config file only used at the time you run /sbin/lilo ?

    - Kurt

  6. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    ~kurt wrote:

    > Peter Chant wrote:
    >>
    >> containing a distro - you wipe that disto it gets interesting. With lilo
    >> you've lost the config including the kernel and initrd you used (if any)
    >> unless you were very carful. I do wonder what happens with grub as you

    >
    > For Lilo, isn't the config file only used at the time you run /sbin/lilo ?
    >
    > - Kurt


    Yes, only during install.showthread.php

    But as per recent experience, Slack 11 on /dev/hda1, Slack 12.0
    on /dev/hda2, reformatted /dev/hda1 forgetting that lilo was installed from
    Slack 11.0. So when I went to add slack 12.1 to /etc/lilo.conf I realised
    I'd just nuked my lilo config!

    Pete

    --
    http://www.petezilla.co.uk

  7. Re: How stable 12.1 really is?

    On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:34:10 +0100, Peter Chant wrote:

    > Mark Madsen wrote:
    >
    >
    >> Helmut has pointed it out in its hiding place in extra :-)
    >>
    >> It also has a sourceforge project page which Gooooooogle will find.

    >
    > Don't worry, found it both ways.


    :-)

    >>> I'll have to look into this. Actually less of an issue with this
    >>> machine as its my main linux machine and runs only slack. However,
    >>> for the other machine which has XP and about five linux distros on it
    >>> it may be the route to sanity!

    >>
    >> That's highly likely. I once had an experimental machine with 3
    >> primary partitions (linux swap, FreeBSD, NetBSD) and an extended
    >> partition containing about 20 partitions of 5 GB each. With SBM in the
    >> MBR I could boot any of the dozen or so distros I had installed with
    >> ease.
    >>
    >> The really nice part is that when the occasional badly behaved distro
    >> hosed the MBR so that only that distro would boot, I could just re-
    >> install SBM to the MBR in a minute or two, with no need to reconstruct
    >> a Grub or Lilo configuration.
    >>

    > Yes. The problem I see with either lilo or grub on the MBR is that the
    > contents of the MBR are tied to a config in one of the partitions
    > containing a distro - you wipe that disto it gets interesting.


    Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

    > With
    > lilo you've lost the config including the kernel and initrd you used (if
    > any) unless you were very careful.


    That doesn't matter once the partition has been formatted.

    > I do wonder what happens with grub as
    > you would loose the files needed for stage 2. However, I do note that
    > grub has a form of console which lets you do a few things - I suspect it
    > would ask if it could not find the requisite files.


    Grub can be persuaded to boot manually from its prompt as long as you
    know what you are doing.

    >> I guess I count as a fan. There's no "fans of Smart Boot Manager group
    >> on Facebook, maybe I'll have to create it :-)

    >
    > No played with facebook.


    Several who hang out here are on FB, but almost none of them are members
    of the Slackware group on FB, for some reason.

    > One thing with Smart boot manager - even in the friendliest mode I
    > suspect it would confuse the non-expert user - however those people are
    > unlikely to be multibooting so its probally not an issue.


    I'd put it slightly differently: if one can't work out how to control a
    simple menu-driven utility like SBM, one really has no business trying to
    multi-boot.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3