Non-PAE kernel in 12.10

[JD]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Henson <hsturgill0 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that when you boot the mini.iso and hit F4, there's an *Expert
> Mode* available for the *Command-line install*. In Expert Mode, you can
> choose which Kernel you'd like during the  install. Hope this helps.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 24 February 2013 20:46, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2013-02-24 at 16:42 +0000, Liam Proven wrote:
>> >> On 24 February 2013 04:07, Karl Auer <kauer at biplane.com.au> wrote:
>> >> "This kernel requires the following features not present on
>> >> > the CPU: Unable to boot - please use a kernel appropriate for your
>> CPU."
>> >> Are you missing a word there? It does not specify what feature is
>> missing.
>> >
>> > Er possibly. If so, the word was "PAE" :-)
>> >
>> >> However, the documented method for 12.04 with non-PAE chips is as
>> follows:
>> >
>> > Thank you for that recipe - very useful (and to others, I'm sure).
>> >
>> >> > I would really like to be able to put Ubuntu on all this old
>> hardware,
>> >> > which is by no means dead yet. T41p, T42, R50, T30 - all still going
>> >> > strong...
>> >
>> > I've chucked teh T21 (just too woefully slow with 11.04, which did
>> > install) and the T42 (which, it turned out, was, in fact, dead). Leaves
>> > an R50 which took an age to install, but is now working acceptably fast
>> > with 11.04, and a T41p, which still seems OK and will boot 11.04.
>>
>> Ahh, another Thinkpad fan! :¬)
>>
>> Oddly, much of Ubuntu is /developed/ on Thinkpads. Was back around
>> 2005, I was lucky enough to go for dinner with the SABDFL and to visit
>> his flat for a drink afterwards. Not a desktop to be seen, but half a
>> dozen Thinkpads in the living-room alone.
>>
>> I currently run a huge Toshiba, a small elderly Thinkpad, a very
>> elderly 14" Thinkpad & an Asus netbook. (And an iBook.) If I had the
>> money, I'd downsize to a tiny Thinkpad and a big one and that's it.
>> But finances, sadly, do not permit.
>>
>> >> I may try a different desktop, or indeed, whole distro.
>> >
>> > Me too. The last Ubuntu that was stable and good was 10.04-1. Every
>> > version since then has taken one or more steps backward (admittedly
>> > often with steps forward as well), and has become less reliable. I am
>> > now boot 12.04 every couple of days - 10.04-1 was rock solid.
>>
>> I have to glumly agree.
>>
>> > It is
>> > almost certainly a gnome3/gnome-shell problem, but I would not have to
>> > run GNOME3 if Ubuntu properly supported a reasonable desktop (Unity is
>> > not reasonable).
>>
>> Ah, well, I do not care for GNOME 3 at all and none of my Thinkpads
>> have 3D hardware so it's not an option anyway.
>>
>> I spent 4 or 5 hours last night resurrecting an ancient install of
>> Linux Mint Debian Edition on the X31. Unused for nearly a year; I had
>> switched to Lubuntu.
>>
>> Last night, I updated it, removed GNOME 3 and LXDE and installed
>> WindowMaker and a suite of NeXT-like apps to go with it. Now, it looks
>> absolutely lovely and runs very quickly and responsively indeed for a
>> 9YO machine. Only once I am in Firefox 18 or Chrome can I feel the CPU
>> struggling a little.
>>
>> LMDE is a little easier and less work than raw Debian. I may
>> experiment more with it.
>>
>> (After 12.10 imploded, terminally, on my desktop, I wiped that
>> partition and put Debian 6 on it. It was several days' work to get it
>> to a functional level equivalent to Ubuntu out of the box. There is
>> still a *very* big difference between Ubuntu and its progenitor.
>>
>> >> 11.10 worked but lost the ability to drive a 2nd monitor.
>> >
>> > Yep - used to work, now does, but broken.
>> >
>> >> TBH I am considering going back to 10.04!
>> >
>> > I run IPv6 training courses, and I still use 10.04 for those. It has all
>> > the features I need, and none of the "features" I don't.
>>
>> I am so disappointed, I am even considering - the heresy! - trying
>> Fedora or CentOS/ScientificLinux and KDE. Since the days of RH 8, 11y
>> ago now, Red Hat always was the only distro family to produce a
>> version of KDE that wasn't eye-searingly ugly.
>
>
I do not balme Karl.
I have an old laptop which can only hold 2GB ram.
a PAE kernel is almost an overkill for mapping so much
space which cannot be made use of, since there just is not
so much physical memory available.

On my 2.10, from the first menu, I select the second
line which will not boot the default kernel, but gives you
a choice of kernels.
I choose the generic (non pae) kernel.

I do not know if this helps - but perhaps it does.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20130225/23509d9d/attachment.html>