You are Here:
Linux Lite 6.6 FINAL Released - Support for 22 Languages Added - See Release Announcement Section



Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?

Author (Read 5704 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #18 on: February 19, 2020, 01:10:56 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
One question, besides a terminal, were those systems running any other programs? or just booted and idle? If the latter they seem quite high.

Just booted and idle. If you look at the PDF or spreadsheet, it describes the "process" I tried to follow in order to measure the same thing with each distro. It's not a perfect science because on some distros the memory used can fluctuate. Usually it would stabilize after a few minutes. I should probably have a fixed 15-minute wait & measure. The way I waited until I saw stability might be arbitrary.

I think the numbers for the virtual machines should be reproducible. But, they don't reflect being installed on real hardware which should have higher memory use because of real drivers working with real hardware. A vm is a simplified environment, and should be the same on any machine. But, when a distro is installed on real hardware, I don't think those numbers are comparable across machines. I think my numbers on the Ryzen 3 3200u are higher than someone would have on 5-year old budget Toshiba. My laptop has more/newer things. More drivers, larger drivers. I assume.

So, the vm comparisons should be representative of how the distros compare in an ideal environment (but not real-world). And then, the real-hardware comparisons are representative of what happened on *my* machine (but, not representative of your machine).

I think it's fun to do those speed-dating installs. I don't know why. It's just fun to visit with a distro for 2-4 hours, move on to the next one. You get initial impressions without delving deeper into it. It's like travelling abroad. I feel enriched somehow. :) I'll probably do it again this summer after the 20.04 distros are out.

 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #17 on: February 19, 2020, 12:33:57 PM »
 

Moltke

  • Platinum Level Poster
  • **********
  • 1134
    Posts
  • Reputation: 126
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile

  • CPU: amd athlon 64 x2

  • MEMORY: 4Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: amd radeon hd 6750

  • Kernel: 5.x
Quote
I mentioned in my first pst that I did some "speed dating" with distros last April. (I collected memory-usage info. LL wouldn't boot then, and I didn't pursue it.). When I got this new laptop a couple weeks ago, I thought I'd collect the memory-usage comparisons again. I wanted to see how compatable this laptop is with Linux, how many distros woul install.

One question, besides a terminal, were those systems running any other programs? or just booted and idle? If the latter they seem quite high.
Without each others help there ain't no hope for us :)
Need a translation service? https://www.deepl.com/es/translator
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #16 on: February 19, 2020, 03:27:48 AM »
 

Jerry

  • Linux Lite Creator
  • Administrator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 8775
    Posts
  • Reputation: 801
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile
    • Linux Lite OS

  • CPU: Intel Core i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: nVidia GeForce GTX 1650

  • Kernel: 5.x
We're just full of surprises :)

Sent from my Mobile phone using Tapatalk

 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #15 on: February 19, 2020, 01:07:37 AM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
FYI: I installed the 4.2 test uefi onto a Ryzen 5 3500u / Radeon Vega 8 laptop.[1] and then the obligatory Favoites->System Update.

I am really impressed with Linux Lite. I didn't expect 4.8 (let alone an unofficial 4.2) to work with this hardware. The current version (19.1) of MX Linux (which I love!) won't install on this Ryzen 5. But, a backleveled 4.2 "test" will? That's amazing to me.

[1] Acer Aspire 5 (A515-43-R5RE)
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2020, 08:14:01 AM »
 

Jerry

  • Linux Lite Creator
  • Administrator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 8775
    Posts
  • Reputation: 801
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile
    • Linux Lite OS

  • CPU: Intel Core i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: nVidia GeForce GTX 1650

  • Kernel: 5.x
Nice job :)
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2020, 08:07:37 AM »
 

TheDead

  • Gold Level Poster
  • *******
  • 936
    Posts
  • Reputation: 92
  • Linux Lite Worshipper
    • View Profile
    • My OpenDesktop Projects

  • CPU: HAL9000

  • MEMORY: 2Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Quantum State VR v.3

  • Kernel: 4.x
Nice work!
Fun to see that contrary to those "other" paid OSes. Updating an OS update can LOWER your memory usage. ;)
- TheDead (TheUxNo0b)

If my blabbering was helpful, please click my [Thank] link.
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2020, 10:42:56 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
I'll try it on my new laptop tomorrow.

FYI: I installed it to the laptop (I installed 4.2 UEFI, then upgraded to 4.8 ). It's working fine. I really like this distro. It good to see that it installed because this laptop[1] is an "Amazon Choice," "Best Seller." I think it sells *a lot*. It's a Ryzen 3 3200u, Radeon Vega 3 gfx, for $320 USD. Seems like a lot of power, new technology for not much more expense than budget laptop. It would not surprise me if people google whether Linux Lite runs on that laptop. (Hopefully they'll find this post confirming that it does!).

I mentioned in my first pst that I did some "speed dating" with distros last April. (I collected memory-usage info. LL wouldn't boot then, and I didn't pursue it.). When I got this new laptop a couple weeks ago, I thought I'd collect the memory-usage comparisons again. I wanted to see how compatable this laptop is with Linux, how many distros woul install. (I think it's fun to speed-date distros too. You get initial impressions without getting bogged down in details.). You guys might be interested in seeing the info I collected:


For details, footnotes, see the PDF or original spreadsheet at: https://jmp.sh/kNTBnT4

It's self-explanatory. The real hardware environments use more memory because there are real hardware drivers loaded, etc. (Although, Bodhi is an exception. I.e., real & virtual environments have almost the same usage. I don't understand how it does that.).

I think the virtual environments are probably more comparable. But, in real usage, the hardware numbers are more realistic. It's hard to equate those two together. For example, Lubuntu is fairly heavy when actually installed on the laptop. But, it's more lean than other distros in the virtual box. Maybe it supports this laptop's hardware better, loaded more drivers (and therefore grew heavier than others of similar virtual size).

Anyway, it's fun to look at. (I think Neon KDE is surprising. I always thought KDE was synonymous with *large*. But, that's not too bad.).

[1] The laptop is: Acer Aspire 5 A515-43-R19L
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #11 on: February 03, 2020, 08:06:48 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
4.2 can be upgraded to 4.8 in the usual manner.


Install 4.2, run updates once done/reboot if needed, then use Lite Upgrade - you'll be on LL 4.8 before you know it..
Installing any 4.x will upgrade to the latest in the series.
No different than those who had 4.2 and upgraded along the way or waited till now.

I just did it in a Virtual Box; worked great! I'll try it on my new laptop tomorrow.

I don't want to sound like I'm beating the same topic too much. (I don't know to what extent my perception as a newbie might be foreign to how you guys see things, whether I should try to make myself understood. Or, if I'm sounding repetitive.). But, I would say that this all looks great. But, it would be easier to orient to LL if something (the download page?) made it clearer (before the 4.8 download buttons) how this all fits together. Make it clear that the latest release isn't for UEFI machines, but the test 4.2 is, and we (vile) UEFI owners can get to 4.8 by immediately upgrading from the menu).

I like what you guys are doing. I can understand how things have gotten where they are, and emphasis(es) being what they've been. But, this experience (from my perspective) has been like an  "by invitation only" experience. It seems like most people would assume the same things I did about the latest release, and not know what they're getting themselves into. And then figure out what to do from Page 9. And that Page 9 is the entry way to 4.8 on a UEFI machine. It seems like LL could be succinctly described for what it is is, up front, how it's different, and what most people would need to do (without the journey I took)?

The OS is the same - you'll get the updates from 4.2 thru 4.8 when upgrading.. No worries.
The only difference is the BIOS installer portion...

That makes sense. I might be quibbling, but isn't there a risk that some people with newer hardware could be unable to boot/install 4.2 because its kernel/drivers aren't new enough. 4.8 might work for them. But, they can't get there without going through 4.2 first?

I experienced that with MX & Sparky Linux stable. They both emphasize stability, and don't include new stuff immediately. My new laptop won't boot those. (But, an ISO built from their unstable branches works great. Presumably the next stable release or two will have the right stuff moved up from unstable.). It seems like this LL situation might impact people that way(?).

I'll post an update after I install 4.2 UEFI on real hardware, and upgrade.
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #10 on: February 03, 2020, 06:49:09 PM »
 

firenice03

  • Rockin' the FREE World
  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 1848
    Posts
  • Reputation: 284
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile

  • CPU: AMD E2//Atom X5//AMD Phenom II X2

  • MEMORY: 4Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: AMD Mullin Radeon R2//Intel//AMD/ATI RS880

  • Kernel: 5.x
Just use the 4.2 UEFI image, it's perfectly fine.

FYI: 4.2 UEFI-test booted on both my laptops. I got the Live-CD desktop. (I didn't try installing. I don't want to spend time on an older version.).

I feel silly coming in here all fired up about an ISO problem. That was a strange "wait, what?" moment (when I realized I had assume too much about the official download).



@az2020
Install 4.2, run updates once done/reboot if needed, then use Lite Upgrade - you'll be on LL 4.8 before you know it..
Installing any 4.x will upgrade to the latest in the series.
No different than those who had 4.2 and upgraded along the way or waited till now.


The OS is the same - you'll get the updates from 4.2 thru 4.8 when upgrading.. No worries.
The only difference is the BIOS installer portion...


We're not left behind  ;)  - we're blazing the path ....


Any version can be upgrade to the latest within the series.. 4.2 to 4.8... 4.4 to 4.8 etc..
You'll have to install a new once LL5.0 comes out - you can't go from 4.8 (or any 4.x) to 5.x

LL4.8 UEFI 64 bit ASUS E402W - AMD E2 (Quad) 1.5Ghz  - 4GB - AMD Mullins Radeon R2
LL5.8 UEFI 64 bit Test UEFI Kangaroo (Mobile Desktop) - Atom X5-Z8500 1.44Ghz - 2GB - Intel HD Graphics
LL4.8 64 bit HP 6005- AMD Phenom II X2 - 8GB - AMD/ATI RS880 (HD4200)
LL3.8 32 bit Dell Inspiron Mini - Atom N270 1.6Ghz - 1GB - Intel Mobile 945GSE Express  -- Shelved
BACK LL5.8 64 bit Dell Optiplex 160 (Thin) - Atom 230 1.6Ghz - 4GB-SiS 771/671 PCIE VGA - Print Server
Running Linux Lite since LL2.2
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #9 on: February 03, 2020, 06:30:01 PM »
 

Jerry

  • Linux Lite Creator
  • Administrator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 8775
    Posts
  • Reputation: 801
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile
    • Linux Lite OS

  • CPU: Intel Core i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: nVidia GeForce GTX 1650

  • Kernel: 5.x
4.2 can be upgraded to 4.8 in the usual manner.
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #8 on: February 03, 2020, 06:21:22 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
Just use the 4.2 UEFI image, it's perfectly fine.

FYI: 4.2 UEFI-test booted on both my laptops. I got the Live-CD desktop. (I didn't try installing. I don't want to spend time on an older version.).

I feel silly coming in here all fired up about an ISO problem. That was a strange "wait, what?" moment (when I realized I had assume too much about the official download).

After poking around more, I can see that this has a "history" centered upon dislike for UEFI. (I'm *very* sympathetic. I haven't liked UEFI either. It's amazingly confusing. But.... it's a quixotic position now, isn't it?  ::) In some ways, it's almost like your *punishing* all the sell-outs who bought UEFI equipment. It's *our* fault for enabling the oppressor. ;) ).

I also saw a "what's coming" communication which said 5.0 might have UEFI support. I sincerely hope you can get there. 4.8 is a *really* nice distro. I love the desktop. It's simple/clean, but not unpolished (which those terms can often imply, like Puppy or Antix). It's eye catching, but not overdone with animations and eye candy. It's just pleasant.

I used Lubuntu LXDE for four years. When I reached the point that I had to upgrade to the new LXQt desktop, it was different enough for me to distro hop. I used MX 18.1 the past 9 months. I'm on Peppermint 10 now. Linux Lite is in that same category of small, simple, clean -- but nicely/elegantly done (not just rough-around-the-edge hobbyist distro). To me, it would be a great alternative to Lubuntu.

If you're working on making UEFI support more mainstream in your distro, I'd be happy to help test. (It's time to stop leaving us disloyal UEFI people six versions back! Its not our fault!).
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 06:24:10 PM by az2020 »
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2020, 04:55:53 PM »
 

Jerry

  • Linux Lite Creator
  • Administrator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 8775
    Posts
  • Reputation: 801
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile
    • Linux Lite OS

  • CPU: Intel Core i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: nVidia GeForce GTX 1650

  • Kernel: 5.x
Just use the 4.2 UEFI image, it's perfectly fine.

Wipe your USB using disk in Windows - https://www.tomshardware.com/news/format-hard-drive-command-prompt,37632.html.
Then try with Rufus - https://ubuntu.com/tutorials/tutorial-create-a-usb-stick-on-windows#3-usb-selection select the Linux Lite UEFI ISO.
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2020, 04:51:35 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
Is your system UEFI? The 4.8 Release Announce is very clear on how to determine this.

Yes, I've had UEFI since 2014(?). Of course, the new machine (Ryzen 3) is.

I didn't realize LL was in the process of implementing support for that. (See previous post.). But, why would that cause a nested partition table? It seems to me like a legacy, non-EFI ISO image would still look like anything else.  I mean, if I had one in drawer from 2010, and plugged it in, it wouln't have a "nested partition error." I assume writing an old, non-EFI ISO today would produce a readable USB flash drive (not the partition error). Something still seems odd about that. But, it's a moot point if UEFI isn't supported yet.

Any prognosis about UEFI being official? I hope it's not to far off because I really like this distro.

 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2020, 04:37:01 PM »
 

Jerry

  • Linux Lite Creator
  • Administrator
  • Platinum Level Poster
  • *****
  • 8775
    Posts
  • Reputation: 801
  • Linux Lite Member
    • View Profile
    • Linux Lite OS

  • CPU: Intel Core i9-10850K CPU @ 3.60GHz

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: nVidia GeForce GTX 1650

  • Kernel: 5.x
Is your system UEFI? The 4.8 Release Announce is very clear on how to determine this.

I've also updated the information on our Download page regarding UEFI.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 04:51:49 PM by Jerry »
 

Re: Burning ISO flash drive seems problematic?
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2020, 04:36:32 PM »
 

az2020

  • New to Forums
  • *
  • 44
    Posts
  • Reputation: 8
    • View Profile

  • CPU: Ryzen 3 3200u

  • MEMORY: 32Gb

  • VIDEO CARD: Radeon Vega 3

  • Kernel: 5.x
I've been looking around and seeing references to "the uefi version." I went back and looked at the download page. I just realized the significance of the "click the uefi icon" -- which I saw before. It didn't look like a person would normally go there (i.e., I didn't think UEFI was that new; I thought it was something else, after the official download links.).

Maybe that's my problem? I wouldn't think a non-UEFI distro would be unrecognized by the bios's boot list (and have that error message by gparted, about a nested partition). But, I don't know much about these things.

IMO, the download page could be made clearer. The official download could say "for older, non-UEFI machines." UEFI being around so long, I don't think anyone would suspect that an ordinary-looking download link wouldn't be ordinary. From what I gather, this distro arose as a solution to older Windows users being squeezed out (XP users first, then 7, etc.). I can see how UEFI wouldn't have been a priority. But, I don't think the average person landing on the download page would understand that. You just see the download link and think it works like any other distro. (Regarding the UEFI stuff below it: once you have the link, what's to look at? That's how I flowed with it. Seems like the standard download's *not* having UEFI would be an important point to raise, instead of implying it with the part beneath.).

While I'm opining... The UEFI logo goes to page 9 of a thread. At that point it's not clear what to do, the state of things, where to get it, etc. (Or, more importantly, if it's even recommended that people use it. From the posts I've seen on the forum, it sounds like people are recommending it. But, it's not clear from the download page.). If it's not ready for primetime, I'm sorry for suggesting that it be treated as if it were. But, it's not clear what a person should do or expect in this area.

EDIT: After looking closer at that, I think the UEFI logo deposited me on a post with the link to download the UEFI version.

I should probably shut up now that I understand things better. But, I still think the mainstream download part of the page should prominently say "LEGACY, NO UEFI SUPPORT". I don't think anyone would assume that's a question (are there any distros that don't have UEFI? And/or have alternate ISOs for it? I don't recall it working that way even when distros were in the process of supporting it, which was some time ago.). Therefore I don't think many would scroll further down for what really is the important information.

And, then, why not just have the link to the test UEFI version there (point to the thread as the place to go to discuss it)? I'm probably being nitpicky now. Sorry. I'm just coming at it from my experiences with other distros. I was not the least bit inclined to expect this approach. I imagine other people would be too assuming also.

Now that I am properly orientated, I am downloading the test UEFI and anxiously hoping it works! I will report back.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 05:08:31 PM by az2020 »
 

 

-->
X Close Ad

Linux Lite 6.6 FINAL Released - Support for 22 Languages Added - See Release Announcement Section