Nothing I seem to do gets this to install. Apparently required IDE.

Similar issues with DOS and XP overcome by settiing SATA to ATA and UEFI to
Legacy in BIOS.

Yes, the OS is old, but so is the laptop Vostro 3560, HDD Samsung SSD 950
EVO and SATA Hl_DTD+RW-GT60N

https://icecat.biz/en-sg/p/dell/n08s5603/vostro-notebooks-3560-15530427.html

Here is one search result that may apply/clarify
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/f/topic-3-5-20399-0.html

And I tried a number of settings including home= ata pci=bios
mount yields rootfs, root.old proc and sys (only the last 2 give ls results)
directory of disc (DVD not CD, if matters) yiels to directories, boot and
KNOPPIX, later with two huge files KNOPPIX and KNOPPIX2 neither has img
extension required for home= and I don't know what the /dev/ for the CD is
as no dmesg works. the minimal OS uses busybox and is really minimal.

Much obliged for help

--
Vasos Panagiotopoulos panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 21:08:31 -0000 (UTC), vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
>
> Nothing I seem to do gets this to install. Apparently required IDE.
>
>
> Similar issues with DOS and XP overcome by settiing SATA to ATA and UEFI to
> Legacy in BIOS.
>
> Yes, the OS is old, but so is the laptop Vostro 3560, HDD Samsung SSD 950
> EVO and SATA Hl_DTD+RW-GT60N
>
> https://icecat.biz/en-sg/p/dell/n08s5603/vostro-notebooks-3560-15530427.html
>
> Here is one search result that may apply/clarify
> http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/f/topic-3-5-20399-0.html

Quote:

| I'm trying to boot a 3.4.12 or a 4.4.4 boot cd using a Dell optiplex
| 745. I get "Can't find KNOPPIX filesystem, sorry." using 3.4.12 and
| 4.4.4.

Sounds vaguely familiar. Did this happen on the first boot after the
installation or still the installation process itself?

Must have been +15 years (between 2006 and 2008 I seem to recall) when I
ran into that, installing from CD ROM. Before the days of ATA and UEFI.

I seem to recall the problem was that Knoppix insisted to partition the
installation media! It stalled when it couldn't (well it's a CD ROM) and
no key would abort it. May be my mistake because I didn't chose which
disks to partition (because Knoppix should be smart enough not to try to
partition the boot media).

After several attempts I noticed the CD ROM LED came on when it came to
partition stuff, so I assumed there is the problem. Because it was
mounted you couldn't just eject it.

Next installation attempt just before being prompted to partition I used
a pin to unblock the locking of the CD/DVD drive and yanked it open. And
now partition worked!

After that I ran into an error ("Missing boot media" or similar. So I
inserted the CD again but Knoppix wouldn't try to mount it (not its
fault). Luckily at that time TTYs were available. I recalled where the CD
was mounted on and a "sudo mount /where/ever/" would mount it and then
finish the installation, yielding in a fully functioning Linux
installation.

But what a PITA!

If this was a bug in Knoppix, try a newer version to see if your older
hardware is supported. Or try something else (Ubuntu, MINT...).
--
Andreas

On 2/13/23 4:46 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 21:08:31 -0000 (UTC), vjp2.at@at.BioStrategist.dot.dot.com wrote:
>>
>> Nothing I seem to do gets this to install. Apparently required IDE.
>>
>>
>> Similar issues with DOS and XP overcome by settiing SATA to ATA and UEFI to
>> Legacy in BIOS.
>>
>> Yes, the OS is old, but so is the laptop Vostro 3560, HDD Samsung SSD 950
>> EVO and SATA Hl_DTD+RW-GT60N
>>
>> https://icecat.biz/en-sg/p/dell/n08s5603/vostro-notebooks-3560-15530427.html
>>
>> Here is one search result that may apply/clarify
>> http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/f/topic-3-5-20399-0.html
>
> Quote:
>
> | I'm trying to boot a 3.4.12 or a 4.4.4 boot cd using a Dell optiplex
> | 745. I get "Can't find KNOPPIX filesystem, sorry." using 3.4.12 and
> | 4.4.4.
>
> Sounds vaguely familiar. Did this happen on the first boot after the
> installation or still the installation process itself?
>
> Must have been +15 years (between 2006 and 2008 I seem to recall) when I
> ran into that, installing from CD ROM. Before the days of ATA and UEFI.
>
> I seem to recall the problem was that Knoppix insisted to partition the
> installation media! It stalled when it couldn't (well it's a CD ROM) and
> no key would abort it. May be my mistake because I didn't chose which
> disks to partition (because Knoppix should be smart enough not to try to
> partition the boot media).
>
> After several attempts I noticed the CD ROM LED came on when it came to
> partition stuff, so I assumed there is the problem. Because it was
> mounted you couldn't just eject it.
>
> Next installation attempt just before being prompted to partition I used
> a pin to unblock the locking of the CD/DVD drive and yanked it open. And
> now partition worked!
>
> After that I ran into an error ("Missing boot media" or similar. So I
> inserted the CD again but Knoppix wouldn't try to mount it (not its
> fault). Luckily at that time TTYs were available. I recalled where the CD
> was mounted on and a "sudo mount /where/ever/" would mount it and then
> finish the installation, yielding in a fully functioning Linux
> installation.
>
> But what a PITA!
>
> If this was a bug in Knoppix, try a newer version to see if your older
> hardware is supported. Or try something else (Ubuntu, MINT...).

I do remember some of those old Knoppix versions that
completely intended to OWN the entire machine. Seems
evil - but Knoppix was never really intended to be
"installed" per-se - it's supposed to be on a bootable
thumb or CD and be THE system.

Knoppix is actually a pretty good Linux distro - has
most of the bells and whistles you'd want. However
these days there are a LOT of those and most work and
play well with others.

For an emergency thumb boot, I use the MX with the extra
drivers. Takes care of almost anything. I highly rec
MX for pretty much ANY use.

I've been trying to get Plan-9 to install - but you
quickly run into scary-sounding prose that suggests
it also expects to OWN the entire machine. It was
made for a 'different era' so that's not entirely
unexpected. At this point I do not expect to be able
to install it to a discrete partition GRUB can handle.
MAYbe as a VM, maybe ......

P9 is another one of those "Unix-ish" systems that are
quite capable - but kinda out of the reach of M$
lawyers. MIGHT be worth revisiting, modernizing ....

On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:27:20 -0500, 25B.R867 wrote:
>
> On 2/13/23 4:46 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> Sounds vaguely familiar. Did this happen on the first boot after the
>> installation or still the installation process itself?
>> Must have been +15 years (between 2006 and 2008 I seem to recall)
>> when I
>> ran into that, installing from CD ROM. Before the days of ATA and UEFI.
>> I seem to recall the problem was that Knoppix insisted to partition
>> the
>> installation media! It stalled when it couldn't (well it's a CD ROM) and
>> no key would abort it. May be my mistake because I didn't chose which
>> disks to partition (because Knoppix should be smart enough not to try to
>> partition the boot media).
>> After several attempts I noticed the CD ROM LED came on when it came
>> to
>> partition stuff, so I assumed there is the problem. Because it was
>> mounted you couldn't just eject it.
>> Next installation attempt just before being prompted to partition I
>> used
>> a pin to unblock the locking of the CD/DVD drive and yanked it open. And
>> now partition worked!
>> After that I ran into an error ("Missing boot media" or similar. So
>> I
>> inserted the CD again but Knoppix wouldn't try to mount it (not its
>> fault). Luckily at that time TTYs were available. I recalled where the CD
>> was mounted on and a "sudo mount /where/ever/" would mount it and then
>> finish the installation, yielding in a fully functioning Linux
>> installation.
>> But what a PITA!
>> If this was a bug in Knoppix, try a newer version to see if your
>> older
>> hardware is supported. Or try something else (Ubuntu, MINT...).
>
> I do remember some of those old Knoppix versions that
> completely intended to OWN the entire machine. Seems
> evil - but Knoppix was never really intended to be
> "installed" per-se - it's supposed to be on a bootable
> thumb or CD and be THE system.

I don't consider Knoppix as evil. Was just a bug in my opinion. Or even
my fault.

> Knoppix is actually a pretty good Linux distro - has
> most of the bells and whistles you'd want. However
> these days there are a LOT of those and most work and
> play well with others.

Yep, never used it again after 2007 or so. Went from there to Ubuntu and
back to Debian.

The new machine has MINT by accident. I accidentally installed it,
because it happened to be on my USB stick I use as rescue ring. Under the
hood it feels a lot like Debian (because it is Debian :-), that I only
realized days later I am running MINT.

"Made" Debian out of it since (basically by modifying the
sources.list). Am very quite with it.
--
Andreas

On 2/14/23 3:35 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:27:20 -0500, 25B.R867 wrote:
>>
>> On 2/13/23 4:46 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds vaguely familiar. Did this happen on the first boot after the
>>> installation or still the installation process itself?
>>> Must have been +15 years (between 2006 and 2008 I seem to recall)
>>> when I
>>> ran into that, installing from CD ROM. Before the days of ATA and UEFI.
>>> I seem to recall the problem was that Knoppix insisted to partition
>>> the
>>> installation media! It stalled when it couldn't (well it's a CD ROM) and
>>> no key would abort it. May be my mistake because I didn't chose which
>>> disks to partition (because Knoppix should be smart enough not to try to
>>> partition the boot media).
>>> After several attempts I noticed the CD ROM LED came on when it came
>>> to
>>> partition stuff, so I assumed there is the problem. Because it was
>>> mounted you couldn't just eject it.
>>> Next installation attempt just before being prompted to partition I
>>> used
>>> a pin to unblock the locking of the CD/DVD drive and yanked it open. And
>>> now partition worked!
>>> After that I ran into an error ("Missing boot media" or similar. So
>>> I
>>> inserted the CD again but Knoppix wouldn't try to mount it (not its
>>> fault). Luckily at that time TTYs were available. I recalled where the CD
>>> was mounted on and a "sudo mount /where/ever/" would mount it and then
>>> finish the installation, yielding in a fully functioning Linux
>>> installation.
>>> But what a PITA!
>>> If this was a bug in Knoppix, try a newer version to see if your
>>> older
>>> hardware is supported. Or try something else (Ubuntu, MINT...).
>>
>> I do remember some of those old Knoppix versions that
>> completely intended to OWN the entire machine. Seems
>> evil - but Knoppix was never really intended to be
>> "installed" per-se - it's supposed to be on a bootable
>> thumb or CD and be THE system.
>
> I don't consider Knoppix as evil. Was just a bug in my opinion. Or even
> my fault.
>
>> Knoppix is actually a pretty good Linux distro - has
>> most of the bells and whistles you'd want. However
>> these days there are a LOT of those and most work and
>> play well with others.
>
> Yep, never used it again after 2007 or so. Went from there to Ubuntu and
> back to Debian.

I've been converting from U back to Deb as well. U has become,
well ....

> The new machine has MINT by accident. I accidentally installed it,
> because it happened to be on my USB stick I use as rescue ring. Under the
> hood it feels a lot like Debian (because it is Debian :-), that I only
> realized days later I am running MINT.

MINT ain't bad at all. Still has a Ubuntu stink to it at
some levels but the overall experience is positive. My
current office machine has been MINT for a couple of years.

For personal devices, I use MX. Last I saw it was still
the long-running "most popular" disto - and for good
reasons. I do install LXDE however ....

> "Made" Debian out of it since (basically by modifying the
> sources.list). Am very quite with it.
>

In article <WDqdnfPHNNth6nH-nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
25B.R867 <25B.R867@noaaada.net> wrote:
....
> I've been converting from U back to Deb as well. U has become,
> well ....

I'm curious what things you don't like about U.

Mind you, I'm not disagreeing. I think we're on the same side here.

I have one machine running U version 18.2 (which by now is several years
out of date, but I don't care); it works well enough - does what I need it
to do - but even there, it just seems like too much stuff going on - too
much like Windows. I imagine later versions are much worse.

But I'd like to hear from you what sorts of things you've run into.

--
Atheism:
It's like being the only sober person in the car, and nobody will let you drive.

I had used the QUantian+XP settup for several years and it worked well

--
Vasos Panagiotopoulos panix.com/~vjp2/vasos.htm
---{Nothing herein constitutes advice. Everything fully disclaimed.}---

On 2/15/23 2:48 PM, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <WDqdnfPHNNth6nH-nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
> 25B.R867 <25B.R867@noaaada.net> wrote:
> ...
>> I've been converting from U back to Deb as well. U has become,
>> well ....
>
> I'm curious what things you don't like about U.

It started with moving stuff around - like networking
setup. No good reasons for it at all. THEN they started
pushing all their "cloud" shit, including it by default
so you had to spend half an hour uninstalling/disabling.
In short they seem to be going the way of M$ - creating
a quasi-proprietary universe of their own that offers
little in the way of practical 'advantage' EXCEPT to
Canonical. "Different" for GOOD CAUSE is one thing,
"Different Just Because We Can" is another thing.

Debian is NO BULLSHIT. Install the base CLI system and
then add in JUST as much GUI or whatever you need/want.
Lots more docs about how to set it up too. A properly
installed Deb is surprisingly small and quick and BS-free.

> Mind you, I'm not disagreeing. I think we're on the same side here.
>
> I have one machine running U version 18.2 (which by now is several years
> out of date, but I don't care); it works well enough - does what I need it
> to do - but even there, it just seems like too much stuff going on - too
> much like Windows. I imagine later versions are much worse.
>
> But I'd like to hear from you what sorts of things you've run into.

So long as it "still does what you need" then don't fret TOO much.
However note Canonical *promises* long-term support but in FACT they
start skimping on the 'security'-related stuff, then other stuff,
after about 2 years.

The ONE advantage of U was the version-level update mechanism.
Alas trying to go from 18 to 20 did NOT go smoothly at all,
and I'm not talking just ONE box. It'd explode about 2/3rds
of the way along. Fortunately I kept a few terminals open
and, between all of them, it WAS possible to force the final
upgrades in using apt/apt-get approaches. NOT gonna do 20->22,
I feel safer literally porting over all the little scripts
and settings to a brand-new Deb instead. Started THAT just the
other day on one box ... waiting for some bigger drives to
arrive before I can finish.

Deb full-version updates are a bit more difficult, no nice
little GUI, you actually have to change some deeper settings.
But it DOES work reliably. Somehow ACCIDENTALLY upgraded to
Buster on a machine once while trying to install a newer
version of GCC ... still not entirely sure how :-)

25B.R867 <25B.R867@noaaada.net> wrote:
>
> Somehow ACCIDENTALLY upgraded to
> Buster on a machine once while trying to install a newer
> version of GCC ... still not entirely sure how :-)

You probably had "stable" or similar as your release identifier in
/etc/apt/sources.list, instead of an actual version name. Stable
became Buster, so to install a Buster package it had to upgrade
some parts to Buster (at least with GCC, which depends on lots of
other packages).

Or if you were deliberately trying to install Buster's version of
GCC, then you basically got what you asked for, at least according
to package manager logic.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

On 2/16/23 4:25 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> 25B.R867 <25B.R867@noaaada.net> wrote:
>>
>> Somehow ACCIDENTALLY upgraded to
>> Buster on a machine once while trying to install a newer
>> version of GCC ... still not entirely sure how :-)
>
> You probably had "stable" or similar as your release identifier in
> /etc/apt/sources.list, instead of an actual version name. Stable
> became Buster, so to install a Buster package it had to upgrade
> some parts to Buster (at least with GCC, which depends on lots of
> other packages).
>
> Or if you were deliberately trying to install Buster's version of
> GCC, then you basically got what you asked for, at least according
> to package manager logic.

I suspect the latter ... I wanted THE latest version
of GCC - and that started a chain of events.

Anyway, I wound up with Buster after all the fireworks.