Re: [SLE] 9.2 and Sax

From: Sid Boyce (sboyce_at_blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 11/29/04

  • Next message: Sid Boyce: "Re: [SLE] C header files" 
    Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:46:28 +0000
To: suse list <Suse-linux-e@suse.com>

    Tim Nicholson wrote:
    > Having put 9.2 on a number of different systems now I have come across a
    > common install 'difficulty' when it comes to getting sensible screen
    > geometry refresh rates etc. On 1 occasion, after the initial boot screen
    > the installer switched to an unsupported resolution so I couldn't see
    > what was going on, and on another, the default screen was also
    > unsupported so that when the system switched into 'use' mode at the end
    > of the install I had a blank screen. (Both systems installed 9.0
    > flawlessly).
    >
    > Having sorted out those issues, I then found adjusting the screen
    > geometry an nightmare. Adjusting the size interacted with adjusting the
    > position, and the final result, as shown using the Sax 'test' button,
    > bore no relation to the results on a reboot. (Yes I did save them).
    >
    > Definitely a far worse experience than either 8.2 or 9.0!
    I reckon 9.2 should have been codenamed "Chamelion". The only trouble I
    had with video was with xorg.conf after I installed the nvidia driver on
    this XP3000+. I had to generate a new config manually to get it working
    with nvidia - since having no luck with sax2 some years ago, I don't use
    it. Video cards deployed here are FX5200, Radeon 9600 Mobility and
    Trident Cyber 9388.
    More basic, we've seen it not install on a new HD until XP was partially
    installed, wipe XP and you were back with the same problem, starting XP
    install, killing it and 9.2 installed fine, then XP wiped and it's OK.
    On the upgrade side, on my 64-bit AMD laptop (ATA100 HD), several tries
    before it finally installed - no idea why. On the AMD 3000+, eventually
    I had to do a new install without reformatting the 9.1 partitions -
    there has been some suggestion that may be ACPI turned on in the Bios
    may have been responsible, it had point balnk refused to install on my
    120G ATA100 drive, but was OK on ATA133's. On the P-II/333 laptop, a
    clean install went through no problems, it detected and configured my
    LCD screen correctly after a non-graphical install because it only had
    64M of storage.
    It's certainly been the toughest Linux install I've encountered and I've
    been using Linux since Linus first put it up for ftp some 13 years ago.
    Now running 2 SuSE 9.2 x86, 1 SuSE 9.2 x86_64, 1 mandrake 10.1 and 1
    gentoo-2004.3 box.
    Regards
    Sid. 

    -- 
Sid Boyce .... Hamradio G3VBV and keen Flyer
=====LINUX ONLY USED HERE=====
-- 
Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
  • Next message: Sid Boyce: "Re: [SLE] C header files"