Re: Xircom CardBus woes
> > So here are my questions: > > - How can I get the system to load the driver at boot time? > > Maybe it sounds stupid, but how about trying to insert it into > /etc/modules? This is a comment from mine: Well, as far as I know one should use modconf for things like this on a debian system. Besides, there is no point loading drivers at boot time, for they will be loaded 'on demand' by the kernel if your /etc/modules.conf is up to date. modconf will take care of this. Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dell Latitude C810: Xserver problems and installation page
> The Server typically crashes when the system is under "heavy load". > Moreover, I found out that the root user doesn't experience these > problems, only a normal user does! Sounds like you're running out of disk space / memory for the normal user, while root still has his 5% reserved space to use. I had a weird problem like this once. Also, check the writing permissions for normal users in general. Maybe the user can not write to swap /tmp or such. Good luck, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Xircom CardBus woes
> > So here are my questions: > > - How can I get the system to load the driver at boot time? > > Maybe it sounds stupid, but how about trying to insert it into > /etc/modules? This is a comment from mine: Well, as far as I know one should use modconf for things like this on a debian system. Besides, there is no point loading drivers at boot time, for they will be loaded 'on demand' by the kernel if your /etc/modules.conf is up to date. modconf will take care of this. Ralf
Re: Dell Latitude C810: Xserver problems and installation page
> The Server typically crashes when the system is under "heavy load". > Moreover, I found out that the root user doesn't experience these > problems, only a normal user does! Sounds like you're running out of disk space / memory for the normal user, while root still has his 5% reserved space to use. I had a weird problem like this once. Also, check the writing permissions for normal users in general. Maybe the user can not write to swap /tmp or such. Good luck, Ralf
Re: Problems with Dell 510C and modprobe
On Thursday 21 March 2002 21:08, Derek Broughton wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 21:11, Derek Broughton wrote: > >> But this is not an Inspiron. I'm not sure whether this advice applies > >> to Latitudes. If it _was_ an Inspiron, the whole problem is APM - which > >> isn't supported. I don't know whether Lars' machine uses APM or ACPI. > > > > Ack. I didn't real carefully enough, sorry. > > > > But APM as well as ACPI is supported on Inspirons AFAIK - or at least it > > works. > > It doesn't work at all (except that 'halt' actually completely shuts down > the machine, rather than leaving it at the "Power Off" prompt) on the > Inspiron 2500, and I understood it not to work on 4xxx series machines. It > probably works, at least partly, on 8100s. I run Debian on a Inspiron 4000, and APM _does_ work. It's only a 2.2 kernel though, for there is afaik no support for winmodems in 2.4, and this model has such a funny device. Anyway, 'halt' shuts the machine down, 'supend' suspends it (to memory, since I accidently deleted the suspend-partition and can't get it back on), closing the lid suspends it too, etc. Even the battery monitor shows usefull and surprisingly reliable data. No idea about the original problem though. Seems like modprobe is looking for a setting it can't get due to a broken implementation of something (ACPI?). Maybe it would be a good idea to find out the settings once the module is loaded and pass them as parameter?
Re: Problems with Dell 510C and modprobe
On Sunday 24 March 2002 17:28, Derek Broughton wrote: > > I run Debian on a Inspiron 4000, and APM _does_ work. It's only a 2.2 > > kernel though, for there is afaik no support for winmodems in 2.4, and > > this model > > What sort of winmodem? My Inspiron is connected right now through the > Dell built-in Lucent modem, using a 2.4.17 kernel. You have to get the > ltmodem source though, and the kernel-headers. But it's easy enough to > do with make-kpkg The same kind of Lucent based as you got, I suppose. It's completely new to me it works under 2.4, as the docs for the winmodem sources say it won't. The version seems to be kind of old than, but I never felt I should upgrade. I'll look into this matter, maybe I can even get a 2.4 kernel running ... > Did you _ever_ have suspend-to-disk working under Linux? You can > actually get the software to remake the partition from Dell (and I have > it but haven't tried it because ACPI isn't ready to support s2d yet > anyway). I'm pretty sure I did have suspend-to-disk working when I first installed SuSe Linux on the inspiron around a year ago. Later I added Debian on another partition and run out of space, so I deleted the suspend partition. Not quite knowing what I did than, as the Dell's software to remake it is broken and does not manage to actually complete the partition. That is, it runs and everything seems alright, but next time you run it it complains about an invalid format or such. Apart from that the software crashes for no appearent reason, so I stoped trying. Also, I used to have an IBM 380 ED, where S2D was working as well. What exactly is the problem with it anyway? After all, isn't it implemented in the BIOS? Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Periodic distro question
Having migrated from SuSe not that long ago, I can't quite subscribe to your points. Most of what you critise is what made me change. On Wednesday 27 March 2002 12:23, Tom Allison wrote: > I am a current user of Debian. > I picked it from Slackware because I was in favor of a faster install > process than slackwares. Of course I had fewer questions in Slackware > because I was always RTMing. Debian makes it easier to not do that. Debian comes with a lot of documentation if one cares to install it. And, most important, you can always use the original docs (of packages / programs) for configuration, which is not true on any other dist i'm aware of. Most try to solve everything their way, while debian seems to be pretty transparent towards the original (the author's) way of configuring a package / software. That is, if you read the author's docs you are able to configure the software. Try this on a SuSe or Red Hat ... > I also picked it because the defaults were more secure (than other > options at the time) and it was an excellent choice for getting > notebooks configured with apm & pcmcia. Well, this is and was always supported by all major dists. So far there is _no_ laptop-specific distribution i have heard of, and all the majors do quite a good job in supporting laptop-specific hardware (SuSe even installs pcmcia when one uses a webserver configuration ...) However, all distributions fail in providing slim, laptop-designed defaults offering only _basic_ features. So does debian, given the dependencies of some packages. Why would I need sshd on a laptop only intended to be used as a ssh-client? Of course this is one package, but to be laptop-specific it would have to be stripped of any server related parts. > But there are a few specifics that are really bothering me and now I'm > wondering if there are not other distros which would keep me happy. > > ALSA, or any realiable sound support is probably the one thing that > has never worked on this IBM A21m. ALSA itself is not to be called stable, so this is hardly to blame on debian. Once again, at least one can use the ALSA developer's ideas of configuration on debian, which is _not_ true for other dists. > At this point I'm actually thinking of going back to SlackWare or > possibly looking into RedHat because of the extensive bloat that > Debian has shown and the latency of the distributions. > > One thing that I'm really frustrated in right now is that the Debian > Stable is whoefully behind everything else on the internet. > Technically, I cannot run the XFree 3.3.6 that is provided. I run 'testing' in a production environment (install once, keep it running for daily use without major changes) with no problems at all. The whole idea about releases should maybe be put on discussion, because nobody is using a 'stable' for daily use. Linux is evolving to quickly to ever be able to release a stable _and_ up-to-date (in terms of features and hardware-support) distribution. IMHO there should only be two 'releases', both of which to be constantly updated: a testing (cutting edge) and a normal (stable enough) version. After all, what's the point in running a XFree 3.3.6 with let's say 800x600 when one could run a XFree 4.1.xx with 1024x768, even if this crashes sometimes? > But migration to Testing has resulted in a cascade of updated > packages, many of whom overwrite my existing configurations. This > really pisses me off to no end. Combine this with the continued > abstraction levels of Debian and it is now getting harder to use > Debian and understand other distributions as well. This niche > specialization may have won arguements with Debian, but it's at a high > price with respect to interchangeable configurations. I may be able > to fix something on Debian, but not on any other distro. Configuration is _always_ interchangable, if you stick with the developers ideas. It only gets complicated once you try to do everything your own way, such as with SuSe. But you're still able to switch of all the distro's configuration, so where's the problem? > Is this a common digression between the distros? For me this is the main reason in running debian. > I know that years ago, when I used Suse, I saw the same level of > abstraction creeping in and promptly dumped it when I was unable to > keep anything configured with the Suse Configurator. I don't know how > this has changed in the three years. It did not get any better. Everything is ok if you stick with common configurations, but once you need something especialy adapted to your needs SuSe's (and all other's) config-tools will just leave you alone in the middle of the desert. > RedHat had a similar problem. Slackware was just very hand-rolled. I tryed not so long ago to enable remote root login on a Red Hat, and it took me ages. So there still seems to be the same problem around. Never used Slackware though, so I don't know about it. If you're a 'everyday'
Re: Problems with Dell 510C and modprobe
On Thursday 21 March 2002 21:08, Derek Broughton wrote: > > On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 21:11, Derek Broughton wrote: > >> But this is not an Inspiron. I'm not sure whether this advice applies > >> to Latitudes. If it _was_ an Inspiron, the whole problem is APM - which > >> isn't supported. I don't know whether Lars' machine uses APM or ACPI. > > > > Ack. I didn't real carefully enough, sorry. > > > > But APM as well as ACPI is supported on Inspirons AFAIK - or at least it > > works. > > It doesn't work at all (except that 'halt' actually completely shuts down > the machine, rather than leaving it at the "Power Off" prompt) on the > Inspiron 2500, and I understood it not to work on 4xxx series machines. It > probably works, at least partly, on 8100s. I run Debian on a Inspiron 4000, and APM _does_ work. It's only a 2.2 kernel though, for there is afaik no support for winmodems in 2.4, and this model has such a funny device. Anyway, 'halt' shuts the machine down, 'supend' suspends it (to memory, since I accidently deleted the suspend-partition and can't get it back on), closing the lid suspends it too, etc. Even the battery monitor shows usefull and surprisingly reliable data. No idea about the original problem though. Seems like modprobe is looking for a setting it can't get due to a broken implementation of something (ACPI?). Maybe it would be a good idea to find out the settings once the module is loaded and pass them as parameter? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problems with Dell 510C and modprobe
On Sunday 24 March 2002 17:28, Derek Broughton wrote: > > I run Debian on a Inspiron 4000, and APM _does_ work. It's only a 2.2 > > kernel though, for there is afaik no support for winmodems in 2.4, and > > this model > > What sort of winmodem? My Inspiron is connected right now through the > Dell built-in Lucent modem, using a 2.4.17 kernel. You have to get the > ltmodem source though, and the kernel-headers. But it's easy enough to > do with make-kpkg The same kind of Lucent based as you got, I suppose. It's completely new to me it works under 2.4, as the docs for the winmodem sources say it won't. The version seems to be kind of old than, but I never felt I should upgrade. I'll look into this matter, maybe I can even get a 2.4 kernel running ... > Did you _ever_ have suspend-to-disk working under Linux? You can > actually get the software to remake the partition from Dell (and I have > it but haven't tried it because ACPI isn't ready to support s2d yet > anyway). I'm pretty sure I did have suspend-to-disk working when I first installed SuSe Linux on the inspiron around a year ago. Later I added Debian on another partition and run out of space, so I deleted the suspend partition. Not quite knowing what I did than, as the Dell's software to remake it is broken and does not manage to actually complete the partition. That is, it runs and everything seems alright, but next time you run it it complains about an invalid format or such. Apart from that the software crashes for no appearent reason, so I stoped trying. Also, I used to have an IBM 380 ED, where S2D was working as well. What exactly is the problem with it anyway? After all, isn't it implemented in the BIOS? Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Periodic distro question
Having migrated from SuSe not that long ago, I can't quite subscribe to your points. Most of what you critise is what made me change. On Wednesday 27 March 2002 12:23, Tom Allison wrote: > I am a current user of Debian. > I picked it from Slackware because I was in favor of a faster install > process than slackwares. Of course I had fewer questions in Slackware > because I was always RTMing. Debian makes it easier to not do that. Debian comes with a lot of documentation if one cares to install it. And, most important, you can always use the original docs (of packages / programs) for configuration, which is not true on any other dist i'm aware of. Most try to solve everything their way, while debian seems to be pretty transparent towards the original (the author's) way of configuring a package / software. That is, if you read the author's docs you are able to configure the software. Try this on a SuSe or Red Hat ... > I also picked it because the defaults were more secure (than other > options at the time) and it was an excellent choice for getting > notebooks configured with apm & pcmcia. Well, this is and was always supported by all major dists. So far there is _no_ laptop-specific distribution i have heard of, and all the majors do quite a good job in supporting laptop-specific hardware (SuSe even installs pcmcia when one uses a webserver configuration ...) However, all distributions fail in providing slim, laptop-designed defaults offering only _basic_ features. So does debian, given the dependencies of some packages. Why would I need sshd on a laptop only intended to be used as a ssh-client? Of course this is one package, but to be laptop-specific it would have to be stripped of any server related parts. > But there are a few specifics that are really bothering me and now I'm > wondering if there are not other distros which would keep me happy. > > ALSA, or any realiable sound support is probably the one thing that > has never worked on this IBM A21m. ALSA itself is not to be called stable, so this is hardly to blame on debian. Once again, at least one can use the ALSA developer's ideas of configuration on debian, which is _not_ true for other dists. > At this point I'm actually thinking of going back to SlackWare or > possibly looking into RedHat because of the extensive bloat that > Debian has shown and the latency of the distributions. > > One thing that I'm really frustrated in right now is that the Debian > Stable is whoefully behind everything else on the internet. > Technically, I cannot run the XFree 3.3.6 that is provided. I run 'testing' in a production environment (install once, keep it running for daily use without major changes) with no problems at all. The whole idea about releases should maybe be put on discussion, because nobody is using a 'stable' for daily use. Linux is evolving to quickly to ever be able to release a stable _and_ up-to-date (in terms of features and hardware-support) distribution. IMHO there should only be two 'releases', both of which to be constantly updated: a testing (cutting edge) and a normal (stable enough) version. After all, what's the point in running a XFree 3.3.6 with let's say 800x600 when one could run a XFree 4.1.xx with 1024x768, even if this crashes sometimes? > But migration to Testing has resulted in a cascade of updated > packages, many of whom overwrite my existing configurations. This > really pisses me off to no end. Combine this with the continued > abstraction levels of Debian and it is now getting harder to use > Debian and understand other distributions as well. This niche > specialization may have won arguements with Debian, but it's at a high > price with respect to interchangeable configurations. I may be able > to fix something on Debian, but not on any other distro. Configuration is _always_ interchangable, if you stick with the developers ideas. It only gets complicated once you try to do everything your own way, such as with SuSe. But you're still able to switch of all the distro's configuration, so where's the problem? > Is this a common digression between the distros? For me this is the main reason in running debian. > I know that years ago, when I used Suse, I saw the same level of > abstraction creeping in and promptly dumped it when I was unable to > keep anything configured with the Suse Configurator. I don't know how > this has changed in the three years. It did not get any better. Everything is ok if you stick with common configurations, but once you need something especialy adapted to your needs SuSe's (and all other's) config-tools will just leave you alone in the middle of the desert. > RedHat had a similar problem. Slackware was just very hand-rolled. I tryed not so long ago to enable remote root login on a Red Hat, and it took me ages. So there still seems to be the same problem around. Never used Slackware though, so I don't know about it. If you're a 'everyday
