Quoting Dale Amon (a...@vnl.com):
> Anyone know of a work around? A change in initrd?
> A change in /etc/default/grub?
Warning: kinda ranty:
This sounds like one of my major annoyances with Ubuntu (server): the
framebuffered consoles & splashscreens that are TERRIBLY incompatible
with "virtual m
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 09:11:06AM +0100, Sander Smeenk wrote:
> This sounds like one of my major annoyances with Ubuntu (server): the
> framebuffered consoles & splashscreens that are TERRIBLY incompatible
> with "virtual monitors" other than a physical connected VESA-VGA capable
> video display.
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Dale Amon wrote:
> I agree, just did not want to say it. I get the feeling there
> are a lot of people working on Linux these days who have never
> set foot into a data centre.
Your statement is full of fail and horseshit.
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubu
For those who do not understand what I mean... if
you have a release named 'server' and it is to work
in a typical industrial rack, then you must assume:
* your console is via a KVM that is probably
5-10 years old.
* the rack has anywhere up to 10 other servers
On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 03:31:47AM -0600, Jordon Bedwell wrote:
> Your statement is full of fail and horseshit.
So you have worked in data centres on racks belonging to
Fortune 500 companies and their contract service providers?
Good to hear there are experienced people on board.
Which also mean
Just fyi, this is the grub default set up I am using
right now. I did try a number of different settings
but they did not seem to make any difference. Perhaps
this is because of the stuff being compiled that
you noted.
This is the grub default settings I typically use:
GRUB_DEFAULT=0
#GRUB_HIDDE
Hi,
I am evaluating ubuntu core 12.10 (this version because of touch screen
support) and I am following https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Core/InstallationExample
and up until the installation of the kernel everything is working (if I reuse a
kernel installation from previous builds (my own builds) every
> Would be cool if ChiliProject could be packaged too (a Redmine fork).
> https://www.chiliproject.org/
Well, that project seems to be much more active, so it _maybe_
could be a replacement for current redmine-core.
As we're still at 1.4.4 base and now attempting to upgrade to 2.x,
chiliproject
