• General Linux Chat and Small Questions v. Install Arch
    4,946 replies, posted
[video=youtube;wt-iVFxgFWk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt-iVFxgFWk&feature=plcp#t=45m28s[/video] Why Carmack, why?!? (Go to 45 Mins, 28 seconds.)
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37074520]With how many things [del]can[/del] constantly go wrong, this makes sense. Does anyone here happen to have experience with resizing partitions after install? I installed linux in space I stole from my original XP partition. Everything is cool, but I want to move a big music collection into space that is easily accessed by windows and linux. I was thinking I could just use the same EASSEUS Partition Master utility in XP to trim the XP partition again, but I have a few questions.[/QUOTE] Boot into [URL="http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php"]Gparted Live[/URL] and change your partition scheme. Ive found GParted to be extremely good for this and i've never had any problems using it. You could also move your music collection over to the new partition while you are in GParted as it will be little faster. Ive had problems with having more than one active parition on a single drive in Windows XP. I would also like to point out that modifying the partition of Windows-XP while you are booted into it is dangerous and will likely cause many hours of headaches. [QUOTE] Is there any easy way to ensure that GRUB will still be in the same physical location and that it will still know where my XP and / partitions are? That is, can I simply split the XP partition into two, and so long as the overall space of the two new partitions is the same as the original GRUB will be in the same spot and will still be able to boot me into linux? I'm worried because I get a warning message from the partitioner about resizing the any partition in front of or containing GRUB... any help would be greatly appreciated. [/QUOTE] Windows XP must be on the first partition otherwise it simply wont boot. You could try tinkering around with the Windows boot loader however it may not be worth the trouble. You can not split the Windows-XP partition or do much else with it. Windows is not Linux. GRUB does not have to be on the first partition. An Ideal partition scheme would be ( Windows-XP, Music, GRUB, Linux ) or ( Windows-XP, GRUB, Linux, Home ). Your BIOS will boot from the first partition only if there are no other partitions with BOOT flags set. You must remove the BOOT flags from the Windows-XP partition and add the BOOT flag to the GRUB partition. You can set and remove boot flags in Gparted Live. You can add an option to the GRUB boot menu to point to the Winodws boot loader if you wish to boot into Windows-XP. You must change the Linux boot option in the GRUB bootloader to point to a new parition where the Linux root file system is. You must also change "/etc/fstab" to reflect the new partition scheme. Far too much information to write for this reply. Oops I clicked the Submit button while still writing the reply.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;37077520]Boot into [URL="http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php"]Gparted Live[/URL] and change your partition scheme. Ive found GParted to be extremely good for this and i've never had any problems using it. You could also move your music collection over to the new partition while you are in GParted as it will be little faster. Ive had problems with having more than one active parition on a single drive in Windows XP. I would also like to point out that modifying the partition of Windows-XP while you are booted into it is dangerous and will likely cause many hours of headaches. Windows XP must be on the first partition otherwise it simply wont boot. You could try tinkering around with the Windows boot loader however it may not be worth the trouble. You can not split the Windows-XP partition or do much else with it. Windows is not Linux. GRUB does not have to be on the first partition. An Ideal partition scheme would be ( Windows-XP, Music, GRUB, Linux ) or ( Windows-XP, GRUB, Linux, Home ). Your BIOS will boot from the first partition only if there are no other partitions with BOOT flags set. You must remove the BOOT flags from the Windows-XP partition and add the BOOT flag to the GRUB partition. You can set and remove boot flags in Gparted Live. You can add an option to the GRUB boot menu to point to the Winodws boot loader if you wish to boot into Windows-XP. You must change the Linux boot option in the GRUB bootloader to point to a new parition where the Linux root file system is. You must also change "/etc/fstab" to reflect the new partition scheme. Far too much information to write for this reply. Oops I clicked the Submit button while still writing the reply.[/QUOTE] Thank you very much. This is what I always get into though: repartitioning isn't exactly a walk in the park. I thought of a possibly simpler alternative, but I'm not sure it will actually be any more feasable. Would it be possible to rip some space from the XP partition and then extend the logical /home partition (the final partition on the drive) into the new space? Sorry for my ignorance, but I'm honestly lost with what I am actually doing here, and that is scary when it concerns pseudo-important information of mine...
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37077762]Thank you very much. This is what I always get into though: repartitioning isn't exactly a walk in the park. I thought of a possibly simpler alternative, but I'm not sure it will actually be any more feasable. Would it be possible to rip some space from the XP partition and then extend the logical /home partition (the final partition on the drive) into the new space? Sorry for my ignorance, but I'm honestly lost with what I am actually doing here, and that is scary when it concerns pseudo-important information of mine...[/QUOTE] Yes its possible to take away space form the XP partition and use it else where. Its very tricky to do this and is not always successful. I killed one of my XP installs when I wanted to rip space from it. I had to re-install it. I shrunk the Windows partition and booted into Windows Recovery Console where it checked the partition and fixed anything that may have broke from the re-size. I'm sure you could find a better way of doing it on Google.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;37077829]Yes its possible to take away space form the XP partition and use it else where. Its very tricky to do this and is not always successful. I killed one of my XP installs when I wanted to rip space from it. I had to re-install it. I shrunk the Windows partition and booted into Windows Recovery Console where it checked the partition and fixed anything that may have broke from the re-size. I'm sure you could find a better way of doing it on Google.[/QUOTE] I successfully resized the XP partition, but still need to free up a primary partition to create a new partition in the gap. Is there any way to turn /var (now a primary partition just after / and before my extended) into a logical? or simply delete it and merge it into /?
[QUOTE=nehkz;37077439][video=youtube;wt-iVFxgFWk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt-iVFxgFWk&feature=plcp#t=45m28s[/video] Why Carmack, why?!? (Go to 45 Mins, 28 seconds.)[/QUOTE] He explains it well. There are more people who want to pay for their products running OSX than there are on Linux.
Alright, I copied everything from my /var partition into /'s var directory, then removed the /var partition and expanded / into it. This let me format the unallocated space after windows as ntfs. My partition order was messed up, so I ran fdisk and fixed it (x, f, w), then I edited the /boot/grub/menu.lst to reflect the fact that linux is now on sda3 instead of sda2. All seemed hunky dory until I rebooted and was met with Grub error 17. Where can I go from here?
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37078470]Alright, I copied everything from my /var partition into /'s var directory, then removed the /var partition and expanded / into it. This let me format the unallocated space after windows as ntfs. My partition order was messed up, so I ran fdisk and fixed it (x, f, w), then I edited the /boot/grub/menu.lst to reflect the fact that linux is now on sda3 instead of sda2. All seemed hunky dory until I rebooted and was met with Grub error 17. Where can I go from here?[/QUOTE] Just to make sure. Did you put (hd0,3) as the partition with the Linux filesystem? If you did then could you put the file on pastebin or somewhere else where we can see it? [URL="http://stringofthoughts.wordpress.com/2009/05/24/grub-error-17-debianubuntu/"]This may help you with your problem.[/URL] hd0 is the hard drive and 3 is the partition number.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;37078510]Just to make sure. Did you put (hd0,3) as the partition with the Linux filesystem? If you did then could you put the file on pastebin or somewhere else where we can see it? [URL="http://stringofthoughts.wordpress.com/2009/05/24/grub-error-17-debianubuntu/"]This may help you with your problem.[/URL] hd0 is the hard drive and 3 is the partition number.[/QUOTE] Thanks, I happened to stumble upon a similar page. I ran those grub commands, but I didn't realize the live usb I was running took sda, so my hd was actually sdb... running root (hd1,2) instead and viola it works. Thanks again for all the help.
[QUOTE=esalaka;37078438]He explains it well. There are more people who want to pay for their products running OSX than there are on Linux.[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean he should just cast it aside.
Am I wrong in thinking there are just more people using OSX than Linux currently? Also, what would you guys recommend for maintaining a music library in Linux? I was thinking either Amarok or MPD; I've used neither but I'm less than an hour away from having finished transfering my music and need to decide on a player sooner or later.
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37081551]Am I wrong in thinking there are just more people using OSX than Linux currently? Also, what would you guys recommend for maintaining a music library in Linux? I was thinking either Amarok or MPD; I've used neither but I'm less than an hour away from having finished transfering my music and need to decide on a player sooner or later.[/QUOTE] Ive used and enjoyed MOC (Music On Console), this is great for me as I spent a lot of my time in the terminal however it may not be ideal for you.
[QUOTE=TheCreeper;37081628]Ive used and enjoyed MOC (Music On Console), this is great for me as I spent a lot of my time in the terminal however it may not be ideal for you.[/QUOTE] I think I will be using the console quite often, but at times I might want a visual client as well; I was drawn to mpd because it allows a number of different clients, so I could find a nice console and visual client. MOC looks nice, as does Amarok, but using both would seem less sensible as they wouldn't share any common database. If I used mpd any changes would be reflected in both clients.
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37081551]Am I wrong in thinking there are just more people using OSX than Linux currently?[/QUOTE] Define using. As in laptop and desktop usage, easily. As in amount of computers running Linux compared to computers running OS X, fuck no, there's a hell of a lot of servers and a heck of a lot of things based on Linux. You've got supercomputers, virtualization solutions (XenServer, Xen, OpenVZ etc.), phones (the Firefox OS thing, Android etc.) and a lot of embedded devices that probably have a kernel that was stripped down for that use case.
Actually, the Arch wiki page for MOC points to a couple front ends, one using dmenu. Have you used mocicion before? That might be a valid option while in X... [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=nikomo;37081869]Define using. As in laptop and desktop usage, easily. As in amount of computers running Linux compared to computers running OS X, fuck no, there's a hell of a lot of servers and a heck of a lot of things based on Linux. You've got supercomputers, virtualization solutions (XenServer, Xen, OpenVZ etc.), phones (the Firefox OS thing, Android etc.) and a lot of embedded devices that probably have a kernel that was stripped down for that use case.[/QUOTE] I meant within the context of gaming.
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37081551] Also, what would you guys recommend for maintaining a music library in Linux? I was thinking either Amarok or MPD; I've used neither but I'm less than an hour away from having finished transfering my music and need to decide on a player sooner or later.[/QUOTE] My personal prefrence is MPD with ncmpcpp.
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37081884]I meant within the context of gaming.[/QUOTE] OSX users way outnumber people running Linux on computers suitable for gaming. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] With the intention of doing so, of course.
[QUOTE=esalaka;37082759]OSX users way outnumber people running Linux on computers suitable for gaming. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] With the intention of doing so, of course.[/QUOTE] Mind telling me where you're getting this from? Because it's bullshit.
[QUOTE=CDeansy;37082227]My personal prefrence is MPD with ncmpcpp.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry for being such a bother, but what's the best way to update the mpd.db? The --create-db option isn't recognized and I can't find a function in ncmpcpp [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] My bad, how did I miss 'u' [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] It lives! I didn't expect the db update to be so fast. Also it's stunning the difference in sizes for the mpd+ncmpcpp packages versus Amarok. It was something like 20mb to 500mb :pwn: [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] Oh god, most of my music is .wma and mpd won't decode that... any way to convert a large library full of .wma's into something like a .flac in place (as in, replace the .wma with the .flac)?
[QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37083143]I'm sorry for being such a bother, but what's the best way to update the mpd.db? The --create-db option isn't recognized and I can't find a function in ncmpcpp [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] My bad, how did I miss 'u' [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] It lives! I didn't expect the db update to be so fast. Also it's stunning the difference in sizes for the mpd+ncmpcpp packages versus Amarok. It was something like 20mb to 500mb :pwn: [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] Oh god, most of my music is .wma and mpd won't decode that... any way to convert a large library full of .wma's into something like a .flac in place (as in, replace the .wma with the .flac)?[/QUOTE] WMA is lossy, convert it to Ogg Vorbis or MP3
[QUOTE=esalaka;37083473]WMA is lossy, convert it to Ogg Vorbis or MP3[/QUOTE] VLC indicates that they are lossless WMAs. I converted a few to flac and Mplayer plays them fine, but mpd doesn't even include them in the music db. Am I missing an optional dependency or a setting to include flac? [editline]4th August 2012[/editline] Plus the file sizes are nearly identical so I assume they are both bit-perfect (perhaps wma less so...)
[QUOTE=nehkz;37083069]Mind telling me where you're getting this from? Because it's bullshit.[/QUOTE] I don't see you throwing evidence around, either. I'm simply guessing but if you're guessing as well I don't see how that gives you the right to tell me I'm spewing bullshit. Generally I'd guess people who use OSX have way too much money to throw around because they bought a Mac in the first place, but then again there's hipsters and artists who believe it's an objectively superior choice, when it quite clearly is not. However, there already [B]are[/B] games released on OSX, whereas major developers don't tend to concentrate any or many resources on Linux. That, combined with the thought that a computer with only a Linux installation (Including virtualised) running that's used for playing games is not right now really a thing, makes developing for Linux a suboptimal choice. Sure, wine works with some games and indie ones tend to see Linux releases but... The ecosystem's not there, it's on Windows, and in a self-fulfilling prophecy people who need Windows to play games because they're not supported on Linux (like me) acquire a Windows license and dual-install or perform a comparable maneuvre. When your customers have Windows, you don't have to develop for Linux. And even if they don't... Well, as long as many enough do, the few just can't play. Shrug. Even if people were willing to buy your games on Linux, are there enough? Are you sure there are enough? Are these the kind of people that play your games? (Would Call of Duty games sell on Linux?) [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37083558]VLC indicates that they are lossless WMAs. I converted a few to flac and Mplayer plays them fine, but mpd doesn't even include them in the music db.[/QUOTE] [url=http://mpd.wikia.com/wiki/Music_Player_Daemon_Database_Updating]Help?[/url] Additionally, check that mpd has the required permissions for all the parent directories of your music dir.
Turns out the entire library has already been converted to .flac before ( I guess I was just behind the times ) so crisis averted :v: again thanks for the help guys
[QUOTE=esalaka;37083585]I don't see you throwing evidence around, either. I'm simply guessing but if you're guessing as well I don't see how that gives you the right to tell me I'm spewing bullshit. Generally I'd guess people who use OSX have way too much money to throw around because they bought a Mac in the first place, but then again there's hipsters and artists who believe it's an objectively superior choice, when it quite clearly is not. However, there already [B]are[/B] games released on OSX, whereas major developers don't tend to concentrate any or many resources on Linux. That, combined with the thought that a computer with only a Linux installation (Including virtualised) running that's used for playing games is not right now really a thing, makes developing for Linux a suboptimal choice. Sure, wine works with some games and indie ones tend to see Linux releases but... The ecosystem's not there, it's on Windows, and in a self-fulfilling prophecy people who need Windows to play games because they're not supported on Linux (like me) acquire a Windows license and dual-install or perform a comparable maneuvre. When your customers have Windows, you don't have to develop for Linux. And even if they don't... Well, as long as many enough do, the few just can't play. Shrug. Even if people were willing to buy your games on Linux, are there enough? Are you sure there are enough? Are these the kind of people that play your games? (Would Call of Duty games sell on Linux?) [/QUOTE] What I was trying to say is the fact that they're are a shit-ton of Linux gamers waiting on developers to give them full support so they can play they're games properly without running into a billion problems. Now that steam is coming to Linux. I bet you from there on in developers will want to give support for they're games on Linux because of the sheer performance boost [url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/02/valve_games_faster_on_linux/](Source)[/url]. So, when steam comes to Linux, so will the players. I bet you. And no, CoD won't sell on Linux because idiots play it.
[QUOTE] And no, CoD won't sell on Linux because idiots make it. [/QUOTE] ftfy ( although this only applies to anything after Cod5 imo )
[QUOTE=nehkz;37083808]What I was trying to say is the fact that they're are a shit-ton of Linux gamers waiting on developers to give them full support so they can play they're games properly without running into a billion problems. Now that steam is coming to Linux. I bet you from there on in developers will want to give support for they're games on Linux because of the sheer performance boost [url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/02/valve_games_faster_on_linux/](Source)[/url]. So, when steam comes to Linux, so will the players. I bet you. And no, CoD won't sell on Linux because idiots play it.[/QUOTE] There's not going to be a boost in Linux users that will overtake OSX users once steam comes. The amount of users will rise, but not drastically.
[QUOTE=nehkz;37083808]What I was trying to say is the fact that they're are a shit-ton of Linux gamers[/QUOTE] What [B]I[/B] was trying to say you can prove that as well as I can prove there aren't. Which is, not at all. Of course there are lots of players but if we're talking about hundreds of thousands of people, that's simply not enough for major game studios! Hell, Modern Warfare 2 sold almost 5 million copies during the first day, I doubt a game released for Linux would sell that much in a month. But hey, do you know why gamers won't switch to Linux? 'Cause they don't have to, and more importantly, [B]they don't want to[/B]. Amongst the uninitiated there seems to prevail a view that installing and moreover [B]using[/B] a Linux distro is difficult and painful and that to do anything more than basic internet surfing you have to use the terminal. Which is somehow a bad thing. I really can't see why using the terminal is a bad thing, though. I find myself much more productive when using a terminal. Basically Linux is often perceived as an inferior OS because when people who don't understand the technical details look at something, they judge it based on the exterior. And for many, that exterior is perceived to be a terminal. (People should be taught to use OpenBox or sth, they'd learn to appreciate functionality instead of looks) [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Niteshifter;37084033]There's not going to be a boost in Linux users that will overtake OSX users once steam comes. The amount of users will rise, but not drastically.[/QUOTE] Basically, this. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Rayjingstorm;37083870]ftfy ( although this only applies to anything after Cod5 imo )[/QUOTE] Not really. They're giving the players what they want and earning a ludicrous amount of money while doing it. I'd call that smart, if anything.
[QUOTE=Niteshifter;37084033]There's not going to be a boost in Linux users that will overtake OSX users once steam comes. The amount of users will rise, but not drastically.[/QUOTE] Oh I know, he was pretty much saying they wouldn't be a rise at all.
[QUOTE=nehkz;37083808]And no, CoD won't sell on Linux because idiots play it.[/QUOTE] Oh, and to comment on this: Exactly. This is why games on Linux won't sell. Because it's the people you refer to as "idiots" who actually make most of the money for game studios. The people who buy mainstream, massively popular games. Those people tend to not be a part of the group that actively uses a Linux distribution as their primary operating system. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=nehkz;37084131]Oh I know, he was pretty much saying they wouldn't be a rise at all.[/QUOTE] I was saying people on OSX who play commercial games outnumber people on Linux who play commercial games. No comment was made about whether or not there would be a rise, methinks.
[QUOTE=esalaka;37084136]Oh, and to comment on this: Exactly. This is why games on Linux won't sell. Because it's the people you refer to as "idiots" who actually make most of the money for game studios. The people who buy mainstream, massively popular games. Those people tend to not be a part of the group that actively uses a Linux distribution as their primary operating system. [editline]5th August 2012[/editline] I was saying people on OSX who play commercial games outnumber people on Linux who play commercial games. No comment was made about whether or not there would be a rise, methinks.[/QUOTE] Well alright then.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.