topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Saturday September 19, 2026, 8:55 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 443 444 445 446 447 [448] 449 450 451 452 453 ... 471next
11176
General Software Discussion / Re: which Linux version for my laptop
« Last post by 40hz on October 22, 2008, 02:26 PM »
You could also try MEPHIS ( http://www.mepis.org ). It's a very user friendly distro with plenty of power. and some of the best hardware detection routines out there. I've had this distro work flawlessly on laptops that Ubuntu had troubles dealing with.

Whatever you do, try a "Live-CD" of the distro you're interested in before you do an actual installation to your hard drive to see how well it handles your hardware. Also take a look at the features and pay particular attention to the the preferred desktop manager (KDE, Gnome, etc.) to see if it works for you.

Also check out: http://www.desktoplinux.com  Lots of good info can be found there.

Welcome to Linux! :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:
11177
SMF Forum Mods / Re: Scanning attachments on SMF with ClamAV
« Last post by 40hz on October 22, 2008, 01:20 PM »
Not a mod, but something you'll probably want to be aware of if you're assisting NGOs.

Take a look at the free community edition of Untangle. This is an excellent modular gateway security package that has integrated some of the best open source security tools under one hood with an elegant adminitrative front end that makes it almost fun to use. You have the option to purchase support contracts and a few commercial add-ons (KaperskyAV to supplement the included AV; remote admin tools; and a "clientless" VPN option) but 95% of Untangle - and all its core functionality - is completely free. Very sweet.

Homepage: http://www.untangle....id=86&Itemid=179

It can be run as a stand-alone appliance (i.e.  separate machine) or on any WinXP machine attached to the network using something called Re-Router Technology. Obviously this would work best on a smaller network, but it's easy to install and test so why not try it first?

http://www.untangle....=434&Itemid=1527

Re-Router™ Technology
Network Protection from any Windows Machine


Re-Router™ Technology is a breakthrough from Untangle that provides network-wide protection from any Windows XP desktop.  Running transparently in the background without sacrificing any desktop functionality (word processing, spreadsheets, web browsing, etc.), Re-Router™ Technology enables users to:
 

    * Provide network gateway protection without buying new hardware
    * Protect the entire network from just 1 PC (Unlike Norton or McAfee)
    * Get started in minutes… No network reconfiguration, re-cabling or extra NICs to install
    * Leverage the best open source networking apps on the familiar Windows platform

These days, the web is a dangerous place, but buying an expensive security appliance just isn’t an option for everyone. Re-Router™ Technology finally enables organizations with less than 25 PCs to protect their whole network, from online threats like spam, spyware, viruses, phishing and inappropriate websites, right from one Windows XP desktop.  It’s the same great Untangle Gateway… but without the gateway!
 
How it works

Re-Router™ Technology leverages virtualization and layer 2 protocols to dynamically reconfigure the network so that all in/outbound traffic flows through the Untangle “server” before reaching its intended destination.   The physical network gateway thinks the Untangle “server” is each of the desktops and the desktops think it’s the gateway.  There’s no need to physically re-cable the network and if the host PC ever shuts down, Re-Router™ Technology elegantly restores the network’s original configurations without any downtime.  Dynamic network reconfiguration sounds geeky and complex (and under the hood it really is) but to the user, it's 100% automatic and seamless.  Some might call it Magic!
 
Features

    * Free to use
    * No hardware to buy or install
    * Runs transparently in the background on Windows XP
    * Doesn’t sacrifice any desktop functionality like word processing or web browsing
    * Protects all the PCs on the network
    * No network reconfiguration or re-cabling required

Link: http://www.untangle....=434&Itemid=1527

I'm a big fan of Untangle. Easy to use and well documented. (Not to mention being open & free under GPLv2.)

Luck! :Thmbsup:

11178
Living Room / Re: [parody]: PromotingLinux.com!!
« Last post by 40hz on October 22, 2008, 09:33 AM »
Hee-hee! Can't wait until the WSJ and CNET stumble upon it and think it's for real!

(Anybody wanna "leak it" to them?");D
11179
Living Room / Re: Things your kids will never know - old school tech!
« Last post by 40hz on October 22, 2008, 09:21 AM »
Heh, heh - Brandon, I think 40hz was commenting on the quality of the music played on the radio...  ;)

T'wasn't me that said that!

But while we're on the subject, how about when MTV actually was about music? ;D
11180
Living Room / Re: Things your kids will never know - old school tech!
« Last post by 40hz on October 22, 2008, 09:17 AM »
1. Mechanical clock mechanisms and wind-up wristwatches.

2. Basement Fallout Shelters (Unless they make a come back. Let's hope they don't.)

3. Analog "anything"

4. Dacron fabrics

5. APL -  "The Last Computer Language" (yeah right! Sorry IBM ;D)

11181
Oh yeah, I had plenty of fun with that kind of thing when I used slackware. And then you forget to use --prefix when doing ./configure , and you end up with software scattered all over. Yum yum.

Got that right.

Then there's also the fun you sometimes have trying to figure out in which directory the executable (or script) actually got installed in...

Since I'm always one of the people praising Linux, I'll now level it a criticism:

That &$#! file structure has got to be simplified and rationalized.

It looks like somebody came up with in an outliner app after dropping six tabs of LSD. What in the name of all that is holy were they thinking of?
 >:(
There is one distribution that is trying to address this problem: GoboLinux ( www.gobolinux.org:-*

GoboLinux at a glance
What is GoboLinux?


GoboLinux is a modular Linux distribution: it organizes the programs in your system in a new, logical way. Instead of having parts of a program thrown at /usr/bin, other parts at /etc and yet more parts thrown at /usr/share/something/or/another, each program gets its own directory tree, keeping them all neatly separated and allowing you to see everything that's installed in the system and which files belong to which programs in a simple and obvious way.

This is what you see in the root of a GoboLinux system:

~] cd /
/] ls
Programs
Users
System
Files
Mount
Depot


/Programs is where all programs reside. No exceptions. You can explore what is installed in the system by looking inside it:

There is a great page up on the website that has several interesting essays about the design and implementation of the Gobo file system. Well worth reading if you're interested in how an OS could be better designed.

Link: http://www.gobolinux...p?page=documentation

From the paper: I am not clueless-or-Myths and misconceptions about the design of GoboLinux

"There is a reason why things are the way they are''

This is something I hear constantly, often followed by an explanation about the difference between /, /usr and /usr/local, and/or /bin and /sbin. I do understand the difference1. If I did away with this three-level distinction, is because I believe there are other ways to approach the problems this distinction tries to solve. In a GoboLinux system, the argument for having separate /usr and /usr/local trees in order to separate programs shipped by the distribution and compiled by the user clearly does not hold. Each program is naturally separated, and this was the prime intention of creating GoboLinux in the first place.

The historical reason why Unix systems have some of its tree directly at the root partition (/bin, /lib, /sbin) as opposed to having it under /usr, is because this way you can boot in a bare-bones single-user rescue mode using those files only, in order to fix problems in the /usr tree. This is arcane. When I need to rescue my system, I can use a fully-featured live CD that runs a complete Linux distribution with a graphical desktop, that allows me to browse the web and search for the solution to my problem, and use all of the features of a regular system to fix it. I understand the rationale for having a bare-bones rescue mode decades ago, but we have a better solution in our hands now.

The distinction between bin and sbin makes no sense, in the present context. Historical evolution led to crazy arbitrary distinctions, like ping and traceroute lying in different directories (I fail to see how can they be of distinct ``program classes'', by any measure). Unix systems have a permissions system. If one wants only the superuser to be able to run a command, then chmod 700 it. I suspect the separation could have been conceived to reduce the number of programs in the $PATH of regular users. In today's Linux systems, having 400 or 500 programs in your $PATH, does not make any difference.

Not only did GoboLinux create a workable alternate file system, but it was made compatible with the rest of the Linux world:

GoboHide: surviving aside the legacy tree
As you might have already seen, GoboLinux adopts an alternative directory tree. As you might also be wondering, without the legacy tree a lot of common applications wouldn't work in GoboLinux. This document explains how this problem is solved by the distribution and how it's solved by other operating systems which must address the same problem. If you simply don't want to read the entire story,  click here  to get directly into the download section.

A long time ago, in a mailing list far, far away.... There was a discussion about how we could get rid of the legacy tree, without actually removing it. We needed to keep it, but we just didn't want to know it existed.

At last - some sanity. Let's hope this concept gets eventually wider adoption in the Linux community. :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:

Mr. Shuttleworth? You fancy yourself a maverick.  Are you listening?



11182
Living Room / Re: Eggnog season is upon us!
« Last post by 40hz on October 21, 2008, 06:12 PM »
ONLY if she drinks the 'nog straight out the carton ;D ;D

Hmm..I'll have to invite her over and find out. Anybody got her cell? ;D
11183
Living Room / Re: Thoughts on switching to IPv6
« Last post by 40hz on October 21, 2008, 06:08 PM »
Well... if every Chinese and Indian want their own static IP, we'll probably run into problems. And because NATing wasn't done originally and some organizations were assigned too large blocks, and because of some of the reserved/non-routable blocks, it is a problem. But imho not as big a problem as some people are trying to blow it up to be.

Would be nice if we could wave a magic wand and make the entire internet (and all applications) IPv6+IPSEC capable at once. But it doesn't really work like that... also, protocol overhead increases, and good luck trying to memorize IPv6 addresses :)

Spot on f0dder! :Thmbsup:

The degree of complexity IPv6 introduces doesn't offer enough "benefit to grief" for it to be happily embraced by most organizations. Especially when IPv4 and NAT works so well for internal use. Content providers (telcos, movie studios, e-commerce providers, etc.) are all chomping at the bit because they envision a whole new range of products and services they could be selling with an expanded address space.

The rest of us could probably care less.

I strongly suspect what will ultimately happen is that IPv4 will continue to be used on most internal networks. Those addresses will route out via a new NAT schema to IPv6. IPv6 addressing will only be used where it is actually required, such as the Internet backbone. Newer routers will be built to arbitrate between the two different address schemes.

Probably the only major change will be that all IPv4 addresses and subnets (0.0.0.0 thru 255.255.255.255) will become the new private non-routable address space.

Yay! No more 192.168.x.x/24 or 10.x.x.x/8 nonsense! ;D

There has been some talk of eventually getting the governments to enforce the use of IPv6. I don't see that happening any time soon. The costs involved in forcing that significant a change onto the world's infrastructure doesn't even bear thinking about. And all it would take is one major holdout to end the discussion. That holdout could even emerge from the grass roots level. Much like back in the early 70s when the American public and business community refused to adopt the metric system despite all the efforts of the US Government to persuade them otherwise.

IPv4...IPv6...why choose one when you can have the benefits of using both?
We'll just let the backbone, internal routers, and DNS handle the details for us.
And why not? That's what we built the little buggers for to begin with! ;D
11184
[/b] for the feedback, which is far more than I know. However, for those with the patience, here's a longer, very simplistic explanation of dependency management

Go zridling! :Thmbsup:
Very nice summation.
11185
Keep educating us idiots, f0dder and 40hz.  :up:



If I ever get the time to set up that bloody Linux info website I've been plotting and designing for the last two years, I'm going to sure to invite f0dder to be it's Official Contra-Pundit. ;D

11186
Living Room / Re: Rats! MS Auto Updates Got Me Again!
« Last post by 40hz on October 21, 2008, 11:12 AM »
Anyone tried Autopatcher XP? :huh:

Yes. It works as advertised, although I've heard from some people it caused problems. I've never run into any. :Thmbsup:

You might also want out check out Heise Security's ct-offline-updater.

There's a good English intro about it here:
http://www.heise-onl...ack--/features/80682

The article is a bit old, but the program itself is regularly updated. Version 5 has now handles products through Windows Server 2008. It supports both 32 and 64-bit product versions and has multiple options for generating CD/DVD images.

Download link is here:
http://www.heise.de/...te/download_uk.shtml

This is the utility I use. :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:
11187
Living Room / Re: Eggnog season is upon us!
« Last post by 40hz on October 21, 2008, 10:59 AM »
Your friend on the right looks just fine, BTW. The cropping did her face no injustice. :P

She's a model. Not even an acquaintance. Just one more random attractive redhead. ;)
11188
Living Room / Re: Things your kids will never know - old school tech!
« Last post by 40hz on October 21, 2008, 10:54 AM »
Yow! An IBM Selectric type font ball? Now I am feeling old... :o

Here's one. It was a common phrase in many catalogs (although you'd have to be from the U.S. to have encountered it)"

"Prices slightly higher west of the Mississippi."
11189
Living Room / Re: Eggnog season is upon us!
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 06:43 PM »
I noted however that the brunette is under the eggnog glass and she looks a tad classier. Wink

That would be Angelina Joli you're talking about? Hmmm...so you like that do you? ;D

Actually, I thought the redhead was much classier looking, but she's wearing a (rather modest by today's standards) bathing suit in this picture. It was from a photo shoot a photographer of my acquaintance did. I cropped his shot down quite a bit because I didn't think it would be appropriate to upload a bikini photo to DC. Unfortunately, you can't really see the model's face because of that.
But to each his/her own.  ;)


11190
General Software Discussion / Re: Getting rid of windows shell
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 05:29 PM »
Both Litestep and *box shells will do that for you.
Just be prepared for some configgin'...

Wee iz not afraid! Bring on da configgin'! ;D

Seriously though, Litestep could be set up to do something like that? Black box is just a little "too little" for my tastes.

11191
Living Room / Re: Eggnog season is upon us!
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 05:02 PM »
Part of the problem might be that there are more breweries than eggnoggeries, so there's more to discuss! ;D

But what's big the deal? Eggnog...Ale...(Brunettes...Redheads...) why not just love and savor both? :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:

favoritethings.jpg

"These are a few of my favorite things...."
11192
If I was to do an appliance, and especially something that'd run on a system with limited performance and storage, I'd probably go linux-from-scratch instead of using a distro - even something that can be as minimal as gentoo.

You could. But there are plenty of micro-distros that would serve equally well.  Still, I wouldn't automatically limit my definition of an appliance to some minimal hardware configuration. I think of appliances as any purpose-built system that basically runs right out of the box and gets administrated via a web-type interface. I'd lump full bore security gateways, mail servers, CMS servers, etc. into the 'appliance' designation. At least those are the 'appliances' I've built.


It's nice that Linux has made provisions for you to compile an application from source. But unless you have a very specific reason for doing so (or you just plain want-to-do-it*), why bother?

For me, it's about getting the features I want, but also not getting the features I don't want. For instance, my server doesn't run X11 and I don't print from it. I want to have as few services running as possible, since there's then less things to worry about wrt. updates, following security issues, et cetera. There's also less dependencies that can break when a stoned developer checks in a patch that messes up other things.

And the nice thing about gentoo is that you get most of the benefits from source installs, but still with the benefits of package management (uninstalls, dependency resolution, etc).

To which I'd have to repeat an earlier statement I made:
From the level of knowledge you've displayed in many of your forum posts, I suspect you (i.e f0dder) are part of that small cadre of people that has specific goals combined with the necessary technical background to pull them off. For folks like you, Gentoo makes sense.

And it's good that there are people like you around to knowledgeably challenge the occasional fits of groupthink and rampant boosterism that sometimes gets the Linux community into so much trouble. :Thmbsup:


11193
General Software Discussion / Re: Getting rid of windows shell
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 01:13 PM »
If I could just get something that worked like FARR or Direct Folders ( www.directfolders.com ) as my main interface, and something like NexusFile to replace Explorer, I'd be perfectly happy. Toss in a copy of the K-Melon browser and Notepad++ for text work and I'd be ready to roll.

Portable-NexusFile_2.jpg
11194
Living Room / Re: Eggnog season is upon us!
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 12:28 PM »
Well...you gotta set your priorities.  :drinksmiley:
11195
I wouldn't say that gentoo is based on BSD, since it's a linux distro - but it's pretty evident where it got the "portage" idea from...

You don't need to say it. Gentoo did: ;D

What is Gentoo?

Gentoo is a free operating system based on either Linux or FreeBSD that can be automatically optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Extreme configurability, performance and a top-notch user and developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience.

http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml

Btw, gentoo isn't made superfluous by advances in hardware, it's just as much about having configurability options.

Agree. But to what point? If you're looking to improve performance, it becomes somewhat pointless to spend dozens of hours researching what compilation flags to set in order to squeeze a 5% improvement in efficiency on a specific platform. You could just invest in more RAM or a faster processor.

Now I agree that it might be worth it if you were doing a Gentoo Stage-3 install as a learning experience Or if you wanted to do it for pure technical aesthetics. That's one advantage of being a student, a hobbyist, or a tech person. You get to do things like that.

I fit into the third group, so I made it a point to do a few "Stage-3's" just to find out what Gentoo was all about. And when I was finished, I considered it a good investment of my time. But that's because I'm a "computer guy" in the tech business. I can easily justify wallowing in levels of detail the average person would consider silly because it's my job to do that.

But if you're only looking for performance (and you value your time at more than $6/hour  :mrgreen: ) it doesn't make economic sense to do a Stage-3 installation. Especially when you realize could get a part-time job that pays better than that, and then use the money you earn to buy a more capable computer.

Where Gentoo really would (and does) shine is when you use it as the basis for an application appliance. But again, that is a specialized situation where there are pragmatic reasons for wringing every last ounce of performance out of your product - because if you don't, the competition in the marketplace will kill you. And there are two other good reasons. First, once you create a fully optimized Gentoo "gold master" you can just keep cloning it until you change your hardware configuration. And second, because you're going to be responsible for support, it also makes sense to get everything "just right" before you ship out 5000 boxed products.

Gentoo is an amazing version of Linux. But it is a niche product. And I still maintain that most of its benefits apply, in practice (as opposed to in theory) to only a very small subset of the Linux community. From the level of knowledge you've displayed in many of your forum posts, I suspect you (i.e f0dder) are part of that small cadre of people that has specific goals combined with the necessary technical background to pull them off. For folks like you, Gentoo makes sense.

"There's some Linux experiences money can't buy. For everything else there's Ubuntu." 8)

With other distros, I've found that oftentimes I get a lot of features I don't need from standard packages (including dragging in a crapload of dependencies),

True. But to go back to an earlier observation I made about custom and minimalist installations, those very same dependencies you don't want installed by default may later be needed for when you want to do a source install of something else. You can't have it both ways. If you want lean - you get lean.

but a feature I need isn't enabled - and I end up having to do those messy from-source installs after all.

I don't know of any supported 'feature' for a distro that isn't found in its repositories and installable via the preferred package manager. If you're doing source compiles for a core function, I suspect you're either hacking the kernal, or getting into something that hasn't been fully tested and approved for distribution. Nothing wrong with doing that (I'm guilty of it myself) but once again you can't have it both ways. If you want beta - you get beta.

Dependency-hunting isn't hard, it's just a waste of time. And for some software, you get into the iffy situation where very specific versions are needed. Installing redmine, for instance, was pretty fun smiley

It is a waste of time. No argument there.

But redmine isn't a good argument for that point. Let's get some background on that story:

Redmine's hassles were the result of a change to the SQlite-3 database table_info pragma that was made by the SQLite development team. The change was made  in response to what they thought was a request from the RubyCore team. Such was not the case, and the change that got made broke all Ruby on Rails apps that were using SQLite-3. What makes this story really tragic is the fact that the problem didn't come about through an arbitrary program change, but rather by SQLite's genuine effort to be accommodating and responsive to a request it thought was from the Ruby community.

Unfortunately, both versions of SQLite's binaries are now found in many repositories, and most Linux package managers will default to the most current version of a binary for installation purposes. This can be overridden on a package by package basis by the person doing the install as long as they know about the problem. In the case of Redmine, an older version of the binary is needed. Unfortunately, most of the people involved with Redmine didn't know about the problem until after they broke their installation.

Now from my perspective, this problem has nothing to do with any Linux distro, it's repositories, or the system of package management. It has everything to do with communications issues between the developers of Ruby and SQLite.

On a side note, I would also like to point out that Redmine is not found in most Linux repositories. Furthermore, if you go over to the Redmine website and read the installation instructions, you will see that the developers have left their userbase a lot of manual setup actions that should have been scripted instead. This is probably because Redmine is still under heavy development and not quite out (ver. 0.7.3) of beta. If the installation routine had been scripted, it would have been a simple matter to check for the correct version of SQLite prior to installation. And that would have avoided the whole problem in the first place.

On a related note, Redmine is a web-based project management application. If you go over to SourceForge you will find there are something like 1700 packages that are tagged  "project management." A cursory look at a few dozen will show several that duplicate, and in some cases exceed, the functionality of Redmine. Many are also out of beta.

From what I can see, there doesn't appear to much that is unique about Redmine, other than the fact that it is being implemented in Ruby on Rails. Now while I have the greatest respect for the Ruby community, and I admire the work of the folks that came up with Ruby on Rails, I can't help thinking "so what?" when I look at Redmine. Especially when there are equivalent applications I can install directly from my distro's repositories that will give me the same functionality without the hassles of doing a source compilation or a pile of manual configurations.

It's nice that Linux has made provisions for you to compile an application from source. But unless you have a very specific reason for doing so (or you just plain want-to-do-it*), why bother?

* That wouldn't normally be considered a reason - but this is Linux we're talking about, right?

 8)

P.S. - Sorry for writing a freekin' book. Somebody else talk, please?
11196
Developer's Corner / Re: Processing
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 09:19 AM »
Interesting find. It reminds me a little of the GRaphic Animation System for Professionals (GRASP) from way back in 1991.

Downloading it as we speak. Can't wait to give it a try - especially now that I'm in the process of finally sitting down to seriously learn Java.

Thanks for the link. :Thmbsup:
11197
Terminal

I think this is just a misunderstanding between two parties. Usually when I hear people say "no to terminal", I think what they mean is for it to function more like a Mac than for the terminal to be get rid of all together.

I understand that VideoInPicture is not saying to get rid of the terminal altogether...

I don't think any user short of a programmer should have to touch the terminal.
-VideoInPicture (October 19, 2008, 07:49 PM)

... what I'm disagreeing with is the notion that only programmers should ever have to touch the terminal.

Some tools are just too useful to leave on the shelf - even if they can be dangerous in the wrong hands. ;D


11198
General Software Discussion / Re: Getting rid of windows shell
« Last post by 40hz on October 20, 2008, 12:53 AM »
A shell replacement is your present lover decked out in skimpy lingerie. Linux is a whole new lover wearing even skimpier lingerie and has a strong immunity towards STDs but is unfortunately wearing a chastity belt whose hole requires more than inserting a key

Fix'd  :D


Uh...ok.
11199
I found out that there is no official user support for the installation of Mono onto Ubuntu
-VideoInPicture (October 19, 2008, 07:49 PM)

That may be because of the whole issue of Mono being a .NET 'clone' rather than for any technical reason.

There are some serious legal questions regarding whether or not Microsoft will assert patent violations against the Mono platform. Microsoft has stated publicly on more than one occasion that they believe Mono to be infringing on Microsoft intellectual properties. And although Microsoft has recently signed agreements with Novell not to pursue legal action against Novell's customers for patent violations (which includes the use of Mono), this only applies to the use of Mono on Novell platforms.

There is also a feeling in many parts of the general Linux community that Mono is a 'big mistake' that does nothing for Linux and only serves to further entrench Microsoft's .NET platform as the development framework of choice. There is also some concern that Mono could function as a "Trojan horse" in that Microsoft may decide wait until Mono has made itself essential to Linux software development before they take legal action against it.

I don't think you can blame Canonical for being leery of granting 'officially supported' status to Mono. Especially when you consider what a thorn in the side Ubuntu has been to Microsoft.

11200
I'm downloading the 8.10 Ubuntu beta right now (Intrepid Ibex) and I plan to install it as a Windows application and run it from within Windows (never done it before, but I want to be able to use my X-Fi while running Ubuntu, along with some other things that Ubuntu still has iffy support for (*cough* 3D GAMES *cough*). I've heard this is the best way for Windows -> Ubuntu users to give it a shot, but I am not sure if it needs to have a separate partition or not. Even if it does, the "real" install does too, so its not any more work.

I can have my Ubuntu and eat it too! Er.. how does that go again? :P

Yep. Do a WUBI install. It does not require a separate partition when you do it that way. Ubu gets installed into an ordinary file on your Windows NTFS partition that behaves like a regular Linux partition when you boot into it.

Be forewarned, Ibex is a beta. Hardy Heron would probably be a safer bet if you're new to Ubuntu. :tellme:

Have fun! :Thmbsup:
Pages: prev1 ... 443 444 445 446 447 [448] 449 450 451 452 453 ... 471next