Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

SabreWolfy · 2012-02-09 16:40:41

@0x14D: Ok, but then was #! (with the 486 image) originally expected to run on such old Pre-Pentium hardware? If not, then the change to the 686 image means nothing and there would not have been a need to even mention that older hardware may not be able to run it now.

el_koraco · 2012-02-09 17:10:35

smoki wrote:

Pentium M must run 486 kernel i think, it not have pae extension so these images will not work there.

hell no, Pentium M is very much i686.

0x14D · 2012-02-09 17:43:24

SabreWolfy wrote:

@0x14D: Ok, but then was #! (with the 486 image) originally expected to run on such old Pre-Pentium hardware? If not, then the change to the 686 image means nothing and there would not have been a need to even mention that older hardware may not be able to run it now.

I do not know whether it was intended to run on old harware or not. You'd have to ask corenominal to be sure wink But it is perfectly doable - just ditch X and be happy.
Also the change to i686 means that i486 is no longer supported. And as i486 is old hardware it is perfectly reasonable to call it that. Only because some people have a rather strange understanding of the word old in regard to computers there is no reason to withhold information.

smoki · 2012-02-09 17:45:30

@el_koraco
Yes they are i686, but will not run on i686 bpo kernels because of forced pae.

Last edited by smoki (2012-02-09 17:46:55)

finbatt · 2012-02-09 17:47:48

Downloaded 64bit.bpo and seeding until my network cable melts.

koleoptero · 2012-02-09 18:47:28

@Smoki: My 7yo Pentium M here (1,8 ghz, single core) runs the I686 kernel with the PAE extension just fine, and with no added "weight".

el_koraco · 2012-02-09 18:50:21

smoki wrote:

@el_koraco
Yes they are i686, but will not run on i686 bpo kernels because of forced pae.

It may not run the kernel, but PAE isn't forced. It's not even used unless the system finds 4 gigs of RAM or more. So I highly doubt that's the reason.

corenominal · 2012-02-09 19:14:40

0x14D wrote:

SabreWolfy wrote:
corenominal mentioned that dropping the 486 image should not cause any difficulties because the older machines it was originally aimed at would probably not be able to run #! now anyway. What does this mean? #! is still a super-lightweight distro surely -- it uses OB and the default applications include gnumeric and abiword. Why would older hardware not be able to run it anyway?
Older hardware in this context means pre Pentium Pro hardware, which was introduced in 1995.
I doubt you could use openbox efficiently on anything older than that.
kajukenbo wrote:
I used and recommended #! to rescue old machines or to give old "XP" hardware a new lease on life.
I guess I will keep some of the old #! images on-hand until I can find a replacement "lightweight" distro.
As above i seriously doubt you can call anything below a Pentium Pro 'XP hardware'.

0x14D speaks the truth smile

Seriously, the 686 kernel should run on Intel Pentium Pro/II/III/4/4M/D, Xeon, Core and Atom; AMD Geode NX, Athlon (K7), Duron, Opteron, Sempron, Turion or Phenom; Transmeta Efficeon; VIA C7; TARDIS; Enterprise; X-Wings Y-Wings; and some other processors.

corenominal · 2012-02-09 19:23:56

SabreWolfy wrote:

@0x14D: Ok, but then was #! (with the 486 image) originally expected to run on such old Pre-Pentium hardware?

No, but depending on the hardware and/or software used, there can be issues with booting the 686 PAE kernel in a virtual machine.

If not, then the change to the 686 image means nothing and there would not have been a need to even mention that older hardware may not be able to run it now.

True, it doesn't really warrant any discussion, however, it was raised as an issue and so I made the changes and explained why. Also, if I had not mentioned it, someone would surely have picked it up and asked why I tried to bury it. Transparency is all it is. smile

ivanovnegro · 2012-02-09 20:24:58

corenominal wrote:

No, but depending on the hardware and/or software used, there can be issues with booting the 686 PAE kernel in a virtual machine.

That is true. You have to enable PAE in the virtual machine before trying to test the ISO with such a kernel at least with Virtual Box.

Zill · 2012-02-09 20:55:18

corenominal wrote:

Seriously, the 686 kernel should run on Intel Pentium Pro/II/III/4/4M/D, Xeon, Core and Atom; AMD Geode NX, Athlon (K7), Duron, Opteron, Sempron, Turion or Phenom; Transmeta Efficeon; VIA C7; TARDIS; Enterprise; X-Wings Y-Wings; and some other processors.

I have an old "workhorse" PC, generally used as a file server but I still like to have a GUI for occasional tinkering. wink

The machine uses a 1GHz Celeron CPU with 512MB of RAM. Will the new version of #! with the 686 kernel run OK on this machine?

SabreWolfy · 2012-02-09 20:55:38

@corenominal and others: Thanks for the replies and explanations smile

Jabroneous · 2012-02-09 21:15:00

Just a tip for anyone who's interested: If you're having problems with VLC--which is known for its many bugs--the stable multimedia repos include mplayer2 (which can be used with SMPlayer or, if you want something lighter, gnome-mplayer), a fork of the original mplayer that provides better codecs and support for newer formats like hi10p. Even with HD video on my netbook, there's a very noticeable improvement in playback.

I'm an Xfce'er, but I'll seed for a while. I'm too broke to donate, so I've gotta do something helpful cool

corenominal wrote:

P.S. Waldorf 'ere we come!

I like the sound of that!

Last edited by Jabroneous (2012-02-09 21:17:45)

I_can_see_the_light · 2012-02-09 21:51:00

koleoptero wrote:

@Smoki: My 7yo Pentium M here (1,8 ghz, single core) runs the I686 kernel with the PAE extension just fine, and with no added "weight".

My 7 year old Pentium M also work with the PAE kernel.
cat /proc/cpuinfo even tells me that it has pae support

VastOne · 2012-02-09 21:56:38

Jabroneous wrote:

Just a tip for anyone who's interested: If you're having problems with VLC--which is known for its many bugs--the stable multimedia repos include mplayer2 (which can be used with SMPlayer or, if you want something lighter, gnome-mplayer), a fork of the original mplayer that provides better codecs and support for newer formats like hi10p. Even with HD video on my netbook, there's a very noticeable improvement in playback.
I'm an Xfce'er, but I'll seed for a while. I'm too broke to donate, so I've gotta do something helpful
corenominal wrote:
P.S. Waldorf 'ere we come!
I like the sound of that!

Nice info Jabroneous.. smile

Next time I give, I will do it in your name!

shengchieh · 2012-02-10 03:00:44

I have to decide on whether to download and try this new image or not.

One question: Is there any speed difference between #! 10 11/11 and #! 10 2/12 images?
Or is the difference primary softwares?

Sheng-Chieh

p.s. I did note a speed difference between #! 10 original (released early 2011) and #! 10 11/11.

Vansgo · 2012-02-10 03:32:45

Hope this can help to clarify:

from the C-

"there are now two sets of images, 'stable' and 'backported'. The 'stable' images ship with Debian's stable kernel (2.6.32) and stable X.Org (7.5), while the 'backported' images ship with Linux 3.2 and X.org (7.6) and automatically track any packages that enter the Debian Backports repository. Both sets of images use backported versions of Iceweasel (10.0) and Geany (0.20). Also, GDM has been restored as the default display manager."

the 3.2 Kernel is better/faster - why not try it and see if you like the results wink

pvsage · 2012-02-10 06:26:06

Zill wrote:

I have an old "workhorse" PC, generally used as a file server but I still like to have a GUI for occasional tinkering.
The machine uses a 1GHz Celeron CPU with 512MB of RAM. Will the new version of #! with the 686 kernel run OK on this machine?

The earliest Celerons were basically Pentium II without the L2 cache. (In fact, virtually every Celeron was the equivalent of the then-currently-available Pentium whatever, but without the L2 cache.) the 686 kernel image should do just fine on it.

kenwong · 2012-02-10 07:09:25

pvsage wrote:

The earliest Celerons were basically Pentium II without the L2 cache. (In fact, virtually every Celeron was the equivalent of the then-currently-available Pentium whatever, but without the L2 cache.) the 686 kernel image should do just fine on it.

So, the 686 kernel should do just fine as well on my old machine, Thinkpad 600E, with Pentium II, 300MHz, 228MB RAM?

I am having the November release on it. Snappier than the February release.

Thank you.

el_koraco · 2012-02-10 07:49:32

kenwong wrote:

Thinkpad 600E, with Pentium II, 300MHz, 228MB RAM?

jeez, don't these Thinkpads ever break down? It will work, all the Pentiums are 686.

pvsage · 2012-02-10 07:52:07

^ Not *all* the pentiums. The first was, as the name suggests, a 586.

el_koraco · 2012-02-10 07:57:34

true that. kewong's computer is one of the oldest living perrsonal machines I've ever heard of. My 7 year old test laptop runs a 2,something GHZ Celeron, and I thought that was an ancient machine. Five years before that, I had a 700Mhz Pentium. Good Lord.

Last edited by el_koraco (2012-02-10 07:58:48)

kenwong · 2012-02-10 08:15:33

el_koraco wrote:

true that. kewong's computer is one of the oldest living perrsonal machines I've ever heard of. My 7 year old test laptop runs a 2,something GHZ Celeron, and I thought that was an ancient machine. Five years before that, I had a 700Mhz Pentium. Good Lord.

Yeah, mine is a dinosaur. But i love it. It is so solid. Of course, the speed is slow by today's standard.

Thanks el_koraco and pvsage for the info. Seems that I should install the 686 kernel on it. Maybe it will work even faster? big_smile

kri5 · 2012-02-10 12:07:34

I have a question, do you have to re-install each time with the new image or can you upgrade as you would say in Ubuntu?

danielninja · 2012-02-10 12:51:33

Hi, i download and installed de 32bpo, i've got an asus eeepc 1018p and my wireless card doesnt work, the network manager doesnt even recognize it.. any tips?

thanks

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#51 2012-02-09 16:40:41

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#52 2012-02-09 17:10:35

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#53 2012-02-09 17:43:24

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#54 2012-02-09 17:45:30

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#55 2012-02-09 17:47:48

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#56 2012-02-09 18:47:28

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#57 2012-02-09 18:50:21

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#58 2012-02-09 19:14:40

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#59 2012-02-09 19:23:56

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#60 2012-02-09 20:24:58

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#61 2012-02-09 20:55:18

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#62 2012-02-09 20:55:38

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#63 2012-02-09 21:15:00

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#64 2012-02-09 21:51:00

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#65 2012-02-09 21:56:38

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#66 2012-02-10 03:00:44

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#67 2012-02-10 03:32:45

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#68 2012-02-10 06:26:06

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#69 2012-02-10 07:09:25

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#70 2012-02-10 07:49:32

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#71 2012-02-10 07:52:07

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#72 2012-02-10 07:57:34

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#73 2012-02-10 08:15:33

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#74 2012-02-10 12:07:34

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

#75 2012-02-10 12:51:33

Re: Updated Statler Images - 10-20120207

Board footer