 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/04 12:00:
>> Well, you must have some serious amounts of RAM to play with is all I
>> can say... ;-)
>
> I think the problem here is that you have a seriously *limited* amount
> of RAM to play with compared to what most other people have :-p And you
> try to run programs that are not designed to run on 5-year-old hardware,
> then complain when they use too much RAM...
>
>
Upgrading your RAM is a snap! Power down and unplug, get the memory module, slip
it in an empty memory slot, power up. And it don't cost that much.
I have 1.5 Gb of RAM, and I don't find that it's to much, just a normal and
reasonable amount. My computer is about 6 years old.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Drive A: not responding.. .Formating C: instead
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain wrote:
> Upgrading your RAM is a snap!
Assuming you can still purchase RAM for your old machine, and assuming
you know what RAM you need for the machine, and assuming you have slots
free, and assuming the balancing between slots is right (i.e., that
you're not plugging 1G into one slot and 128M into another slot that
upsets the BIOS), it's straightforward.
But yah, it's maybe one step harder than replacing your hard drive, with
the benefit that it's volatile, so every program already accounts for
losing the data in it. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:06:16 -0500, Alain wrote:
> And it don't cost that
> much.
That's all in the eye of the beholder; I just purchased 2 GB of RAM and
it was about $50 here. Not terribly expensive, but then again I had an
extra $50 to spend on the memory. If you don't have it, of course, then
$50 is a lot of money to spend.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:30:30 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> No, actually. Something like "could not aquire package directory lock".
> If it said "you must be root" I wouldn't have had to try several times
> and wander around looking for where said lock might be in order to
> install the software.
Oh, right, that is what it says - unable to lock database or unable to
get exclusive lock.
I hit that every once in a while, but know that it means "yo, idiot,
you're not root!" - using the YaST software installer prompts you to
login; using Red Carpet would allow you to set rights, so I'd either use
rug or yast2 myself...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:29:27 -0800, Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>>> And what system lets you install applications and change settings that
>>> *doesn't* let you screw things up?
>>
>> MacOS X?
>
> OK, fair enough. Altho I'd be surprised if you could install
> applications without screwing up your system. See the new Mac OsX trojan
> floating around.
>
>> Most unix programs can be installed locally. If some can't, they are
>> stupid.
>
> I don't know how to do this from an RPM.
Generally, you can't - though if you use something like rpm2cpio to
convert it to a cpio archive, you can then unpack it and configure things
to run locally. Alien might also be able to help you out with this as
well.
This is one thing I like about Autopackage, actually - it will do non-
root installs and set things up for you.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:30:30 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>
>> No, actually. Something like "could not aquire package directory lock".
>> If it said "you must be root" I wouldn't have had to try several times
>> and wander around looking for where said lock might be in order to
>> install the software.
>
> Oh, right, that is what it says - unable to lock database or unable to
> get exclusive lock.
>
> I hit that every once in a while, but know that it means "yo, idiot,
> you're not root!" - using the YaST software installer prompts you to
> login; using Red Carpet would allow you to set rights, so I'd either use
> rug or yast2 myself...
Well, yeah, I do now. I mean, I learned what it meant. Would it really
have been that hard to put
if (euid() != 0) {
fprintf(stderr, "You gotta be root!\n");
exit(1);
}
at the start of the code?
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New escribió:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:30:30 -0800, Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> No, actually. Something like "could not aquire package directory lock".
>>> If it said "you must be root" I wouldn't have had to try several times
>>> and wander around looking for where said lock might be in order to
>>> install the software.
>>
>> Oh, right, that is what it says - unable to lock database or unable to
>> get exclusive lock.
>>
>> I hit that every once in a while, but know that it means "yo, idiot,
>> you're not root!" - using the YaST software installer prompts you to
>> login; using Red Carpet would allow you to set rights, so I'd either
>> use rug or yast2 myself...
>
> Well, yeah, I do now. I mean, I learned what it meant. Would it really
> have been that hard to put
> if (euid() != 0) {
> fprintf(stderr, "You gotta be root!\n");
> exit(1);
> }
> at the start of the code?
>
Debian's dpkg message:
E: Could not open lock file /var/lib/dpkg/lock - open (13 Permission denied)
E: Unable to lock the administration directory (/var/lib/dpkg/), are you
root?
Doesn't even check for the userid; but it assumes the most common reason
for failing to acquire the lock is because of running it as non-root,
and mentions it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Well, you must have some serious amounts of RAM to play with is all I
>> can say... ;-)
>
> I think the problem here is that you have a seriously *limited* amount
> of RAM to play with compared to what most other people have :-p And you
> try to run programs that are not designed to run on 5-year-old hardware,
> then complain when they use too much RAM...
And I think the problem here is that software writers *expect* to just
be able to waste RAM whenever they feel like it because, after all,
"everybody has lots of RAM now, don't they?"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> And I think the problem here is that software writers *expect* to just be
> able to waste RAM whenever they feel like it because, after all,
> "everybody has lots of RAM now, don't they?"
Yup, and in the same way that game writers make 3D models with 200k faces
instead of 200 faces, just because everyone has a decent 3D card nowadays.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:472ee37c$1@news.povray.org...
> scott wrote:
>>> Well, you must have some serious amounts of RAM to play with is all I
>>> can say... ;-)
>>
>> I think the problem here is that you have a seriously *limited* amount of
>> RAM to play with compared to what most other people have :-p And you try
>> to run programs that are not designed to run on 5-year-old hardware, then
>> complain when they use too much RAM...
>
> And I think the problem here is that software writers *expect* to just be
> able to waste RAM whenever they feel like it because, after all,
> "everybody has lots of RAM now, don't they?"
If you can't afford to update, fair enough, but then you should accept it's
simply a fact of life the world will always change and not everyone can stay
current all the time. Everyone has different life circumstances and it's
pointless blaming the rest of the world for not stopping to wait for the guy
who's 5 years behind just so he can catch up. Yeah it's disapponting not
having money to update, but getting frustrated at the world is a totally
useless emotion, especially as getting cranky at everything isn't going to
change anything and you'll still have the same problem tomorrow, but with
even less energy to do anything positive about it.
If the Sunrise in the morning blinds you through the bedroom window every
morning, you don't get all cranky and yell at the Sun do you? You know it
is always like that and you change your house to solve the problem and
adapt.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
