Linux for your taste (sorry Naw :D) (27 Viewers)

What OS do you use?

  • Windows

  • Linux

  • Mac

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
Rami said:
Another thing, in the config settings, under architecture, I couldn't find how i could compile for 686 chips in particular, how could explicitly choose the architecture??
In the kernel you mean?

Processor type and features --->
Subarchitecture Type (PC-compatible) --->
Processor family (Pentium M) --->
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

V

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2005
20,110
  • V

    V

lol



Shocking Statement: Windows Vista Doesn't Need Anti-Virus Software
by Chris Sabga on 20061116 @ 02:01PM EST | google it | send to friends
Channel: Windows | Infopackets Gazette | (related terms: parental controls vista, machine, antivirus)





It has been drummed into the minds of PC users for years that anti-virus software is an absolute must! That's why most new computers today come with a limited time subscription for free anti-virus protection.

However, Microsoft co-president Jim Allchin boldly declared in a recent press conference that he's completely comfortable running Vista minus a program that shields his little boy's computer from viruses.

"My son, seven years old, runs Windows Vista, and, honestly, he doesn't have an antivirus system on his machine," Allchin said. "His machine is locked down with parental controls, he can't download things unless it's to the places that I've said that he could do, and I'm feeling totally confident about that. That is quite a statement. I couldn't say that in Windows XP SP2."






Allchin's supreme confidence can be summed up in four letters: ASLR. That stands for Address Space Layout Randomization, and it's a new technology that has been developed for Vista.

Here's how it works: "Each Windows Vista machine is slightly different than every other Windows Vista machine," Allchin explained. "So even if there is a remote exploit on one machine, and a worm tries to jump from one machine to another, the probability of that actually succeeding is very small. And I wanted to do this in Windows XP SP2, but we couldn't figure out how to do it. So then a smart guy here came up with a solution, so we put it in Windows Vista."

But Allchin did admit that "there's just no way for us to say that some perfection has been achieved [with Vista and its new ASLR technology]." (Source: betanews.com)

A world where computers are much safer from the threat of viruses sounds like a lovely dream. Unfortunately, Allchin eventually had to later "clarify" (retract) his grandiose claims.

From his official blog about Windows Vista:

"Wow, you describe a specific situation and suddenly people extrapolate something completely different! ... The point I had been trying to make (albeit unclearly) is that Windows Vista includes new security features that can dramatically help improve our customers' security for certain situations. ... I ended up telling a story about how the machine my seven-year-old son uses has no antivirus software installed because it runs in a very locked down configuration, which includes only being able to visit websites on an approved list (approved through the parental controls feature in Windows Vista). He also has no access to email or instant messaging and he doesn't run as an administrator of the machine. In fact, parental controls in Windows Vista requires that the user you apply controls to is not running as an administrator. Email, phishing, and other social engineering attacks are definitely among the most prevalent attacks that home users experience today, and his machine has been locked down in these regards. ... Now, the comments have unfortunately been cited out of context implying that I said Windows Vista users shouldn't use antivirus. I want to be clear, most users will use some form of antivirus software, and that will be appropriate for their scenarios. In fact, Windows Security Center, a great feature in Windows Vista, specifically encourages the use of antivirus software." (Source: windowsvistablog.com)
 

Rami

The Linuxologist
Dec 24, 2004
8,065
Ok I have a problem now, when I boot up Ubuntu I get these errors. It keeps giving them for sometime and then boots regularly....Whats wrong? Martin? Naw? Anybody?
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
/dev/hdc is prolly your cdrom, am I right? I get lots of kernel errors from my dvd driver, bad media, bad drive, who knows. As long as it works.. At one point it became so buggy that the bastard wouldn't boot cause it choked on those errors, so I compiled the cdrom driver as a module, which I loaded manually after booting, worked perfectly and stopped the kernel panic.

If it's nooot your cd/dvd, it might be more of a worry..
 

Rami

The Linuxologist
Dec 24, 2004
8,065
Honestly I do not know what hdc is??

My hard drives are hda1,2,3...etc

and my two cdroms are cdrom0 and dvdram or something like that...
 

V

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2005
20,110
  • V

    V

most likely your cd rom is hdc. i have 2 drives; hda, sda and hdc is my cd rom. if you have only one hard drive then hdc is definetly your cdrom.
 

Rami

The Linuxologist
Dec 24, 2004
8,065
vlatko said:
most likely your cd rom is hdc. i have 2 drives; hda, sda and hdc is my cd rom. if you have only one hard drive then hdc is definetly your cdrom.
Martin said:
/dev/hdc is prolly your cdrom, am I right? I get lots of kernel errors from my dvd driver, bad media, bad drive, who knows. As long as it works.. At one point it became so buggy that the bastard wouldn't boot cause it choked on those errors, so I compiled the cdrom driver as a module, which I loaded manually after booting, worked perfectly and stopped the kernel panic.

If it's nooot your cd/dvd, it might be more of a worry..
After some investigation, yes it is my cdrom driver...For some reason it was not working when Martin suggested it...

Anyways how does one go about compiling a cdrom driver as a module :D??
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
No, but the xbox was a pretty popular way to get a cheap headless server for your closet or something, so the ps3 might too. Although the video cards (dual sli pci-x or something like that?) will be wasted that way.
 

Rami

The Linuxologist
Dec 24, 2004
8,065
Gray, for some reason your link is not working for me, could you post the article here??

EDIT: It's working now, thanks...
 

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,260
Hmm, I think I've learned "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" the hard way.

I was fiddling around with my xorg.conf for some reason, and when I rebooted I got the error message that my GUI session couldn't be started. (I don't have backups of my xorg.conf, I checked).

I fiddled around with my xorg.conf again and typed 'startx', then pulled up a terminal, and my fglrxinfo output showed the correct ATI stuff instead of MESA. (This next bit is a bit shady, I don't know how to explain it). But then I realised that I wasn't logged in 'properly', in that when I pressed "Quit", the 'shut down' and 'restart' options weren't available to me.

When I rebooted my system and logged in again, I was given the "Couldn't open screen 0" message.

I've read that it's got something to do with being logged in as root, though that didn't make much sense to me, since you're not normally logged in as root anyway...

Why does my card work properly only when Ubuntu doesn't boot up properly and kicks me to the command line, so I have to fix it up and type 'startx' manually?
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
Here's the deal, graham (and btw "don't fix it" doesn't apply on linux, in fact we say "break it, fix it" :wink: ), when you run startx you bypass gdm, the login manager, the program that displays the graphical login to you (and also manages multiple X sessions if there are several concurrent users). So when using startx you don't have a session with the login manager, which means you can't log out as you're not logged in (in the sense of gdm, of course).

startx is the quickest way to test if your xorg.conf is sane. And if startx works, then the X server should work no matter what. So your case sounds a little suspicious. You could also log in as root at the terminal and run startx to see if there's a difference, there shouldn't be.

However, when you get a fatal error from Xorg, it usually doesn't just print the fatal error, it also prints what went wrong above that line. Look in /var/log/Xorg.0.log and particularly for lines containing WW (warnings) and EE (errors).

cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep WW
cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | grep EE

Usually when something goes wrong with fglrx, I can immediately find out by reading the WW lines.
 

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,260
ahhh thanks for the explanation M :)

(WW) Warning, couldn't open module synaptics
(WW) fglrx(0): board is an unknown third party board, chipset is supported
(WW) fglrx(0): Option "VendorName" is not used
(WW) fglrx(0): Option "ModelName" is not used



(EE) Failed to load module "synaptics" (module does not exist, 0)
(EE) AIGLX error: dlsym for __driCreateNewScreen_20050727 failed (/usr/lib/dri/fglrx_dri.so: undefined symbol: __driCreateNewScreen_20050727)
(EE) AIGLX: reverting to software rendering
(EE) No Input driver matching `synaptics'


EDIT: btw I should've mentioned that I've fixed up my xorg.conf so I get my GUI, but as I said fglrxinfo tells me that it couldn't open screen 0

I'm assuming it's something to do with the lines in red?
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,913
I'd say synaptics is the deal breaker there. The AIGLX errors come up, but don't prevent X from running, although I specifically disabled AIGLX to prevent them.

synaptics it's also the last message, so that's usually where it crashes.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 21)