Out of Space

[Barmann]

On 08/08/2016 02:00 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 8 August 2016 at 18:16, Gene Heskett <gheskett at shentel.net> wrote:
>> But it still refuses to recognize a prepared disk, and you are still
>> forced to rewrite the parttition table, and may wind up with /boot being
>> 850 gigs into the terabyte disk, and out of reach of the machines bios
>> to reboot to at the end of the install.
>>
>>> Colin
>> I have done that Colin, every ubuntu install I have ever done starting
>> with 6-04 LTS. And become stuck in a loop, which it would not let me out
>> of until I gave up, restarted, and let it do as it pleased on the 4th or
>> 5th try. I have prepared a new disk with gparted, and the *buntu
>> installer can't see it as anything but an unformatted, unpartitioned
>> drive.
> It's you.
>
> I don't know what you're doing, Gene, but it's you.
>
> I have installed *hundreds* of Linux distros this way, going back over
> 20y now. I almost never use the distro's own partitioning tool and I
> never, EVER let it auto-partition unless it's a disposable VM with a
> blank virtual disk that will only ever run a single OS.
>
> I can personally attest that you can use DOS fdisk, Linux fdisk,
> cfdisk, Partition Magic, GParted, and at a push even NT Disk Manager
> to create your partitions and then use them in the installer with the
> following distributions:
> * Debian
> * Red Hat Linux
> * CentOS
> * Fedora
> * Crunchbang
> * Arch
> * Corel LinuxOS
> * Caldera OpenLinux
> * SUSE
> * OpenSUSE
> * SLES
> * Lindows
> * Linspire
> * Xandros
> * Mint
> * Mint Debian Edition
> * Mandrake
> * Mandriva
> * Slackware
>
> I could go on but I've made my point. I have run every major distro
> since 1995 and I have tried ALL of them on a variety of hardware as
> well as VMs and _YES_, you can pre-create partitions and use them in
> all of them.
>
> Even Fedora which hates it.
>
> The only one you can't are pre-configured servers such as SME Server,
> ClarkConnect, OpenMediaVault, Smoothwall etc., where they _must_ do it
> for you.
>
>> IMNSHO  thats BS, and the *buntu installer therefore is broken.
> You're wrong. I am no greenhorn myself here, Gene, I am 50 next year
> and I've been using Unix systems since 1988 and I am telling you that
> YOU ARE WRONG.
>
> I am sorry, but you are wrong.
>
> What Colin and I and a million other are describing is the truth, and
> I've done it with more Linux distros than I suspect you even know
> exist because that's one of the things I do: I evaluate OSes and I
> write about them, for money.
>
> I have read you describe how you can't use NetworkManager because you
> do not configure your network in a proper, standards-compliant way,
> and you'd rather rip out part of the network stack of your OS and
> hand-wire it than reconfigure your network in correctly with, for
> instance, DHCP leases permanently assigned to MAC addresses and a
> local name server.
>
> I have read you describe how you control CNC mills with Linux boxes
> and need a realtime kernel *but* you also want to run a full local
> Internet client stack on those machines, with a web browser etc., and
> you complain that it doesn't work. No, it doesn't, because that is not
> something that a sensible sysadmin would want to do. You should use
> realtime systems for machine control work and not have browsers etc.
> on them at all, and you should browse the web and do email on a modern
> distro with the standard kernel and all current patches.
>
> But I know that you like to do things your own way, and that is your
> privilege. They're your computers, you use them as you wish. That's
> fine.
>
> But you don't get to complain that, for instance, NetworkManager is
> broken when it works fine for hundreds of millions of users but your
> network config is wildly non-standard. I have told you off for this
> before.
>
> And now, you are trying it again, saying that the Ubuntu install
> program cannot do things that I HAVE PERSONALLY DONE WITH IT IN THE
> LAST 30 DAYS.
>
> It works fine, Gene. I have seen it with my own eyes. I've been using
> this distro daily since October 2004. There has never been a release
> version of Ubuntu that I have not installed. It has had problems, but
> the installer 100% definitely can install onto pre-configured
> partitions and it works great.
>
> Fedora's Anaconda installer, not so much.
>
> But Ubiquity is fine.
>
>
> I was trying to install the Ubuntu 16.04 and diid the format that it called for in the begining of the install and now I have: Boot from CD : error: file '/boot/grub/i386-pc/normal.mod' not found. Entering resue  mode... grub rescue>
What did I or the burned CD do?
Dick