Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Jimbob on 31 March 2010, 08:38:56
-
Updates all round last night apparently...
Mine came back fine.
Her Vista laptop stuck on the booting screen >:(
Thats a job I could do without
grrrrr, chunner chunner chunner rant.
-
Why do you think I went over to Linux? Once I get a bit more proficient I'll be putting Ubuntu on her lappy too as it's more user friendly :y
-
Jimbob - if you think it was the patch, to be honest, there was probably corruption on the system that existed before to be honest.
Gaffers - In my (pretty extensive - its what I do) experience, Linux patches tend to cause more grief due to differing dependencies. Please don't fall into the trap of believing that Linux (all varients) doesn't need regular patching :)
-
the MS10-018 update that seems to be the one should only be affecting IE8...
so shouldnt be causing any boot issues.
its the stopping booting after loading crcdisk.sys
pity it doesnt then say starting loading xxx, would make diags a little easier.
-
Uh-oh.
Wont even boot mini xp off bootcd :'(
-
seems like pcs having spring flu ;D
my tv card give up when I installed another 2 mbs of ram.. its been more than 2 weeks cant watch anything >:(
-
Uh-oh.
Wont even boot mini xp off bootcd :'(
OH! That rules out the update then :o
Using latest version?
-
Uh-oh.
Wont even boot mini xp off bootcd :'(
OH! That rules out the update then :o
Using latest version?
.2 off the latest version...im on 10.0 (at the mo ;) )
Some hardware diags running now....
Im sure I left one running....when I returned the pc was off....and needed power removing before it would turn on :'(
-
does a dos based diags show anything?
-
does a dos based diags show anything?
dunno built in HDD Diag running now, and has been for some time....
1/2 way through.
-
No idea why, but got a hunch on memory.....
-
well the disk diag finished fine...and windows recovered and started fine...
so currently 'tidying up' fully backing up etc, looking HDD / memory to me.
Ive got some spare memory I can rule that out with after some diags.
Fingers crossed
-
Jimbob - if you think it was the patch, to be honest, there was probably corruption on the system that existed before to be honest.
Gaffers - In my (pretty extensive - its what I do) experience, Linux patches tend to cause more grief due to differing dependencies. Please don't fall into the trap of believing that Linux (all varients) doesn't need regular patching :)
Dont worry I'm not that narrow minded ::)
I dont mind tinkering with something I haven't had to pay for to get it working, besides it increases my IT knowledge which since switching careers has been massively neglected.
I just dont beleive that I should have issues with an operating system or program that I have paid for, developers are paid to ensure that it works not release it and then patch it or release warning notes that it 'might not be compatible with x, y, z.....'
-
I dont mind tinkering with something I haven't had to pay for to get it working, besides it increases my IT knowledge which since switching careers has been massively neglected.
My thoughts exactly. Windows is like buying a car that's supposed to be maintenance free, which subsequently breaks down by the side of the road, and, despite having enough knowledge to repair it, you find that they've welded the bonnet closed. >:(
Kevin
-
Jimbob - if you think it was the patch, to be honest, there was probably corruption on the system that existed before to be honest.
Gaffers - In my (pretty extensive - its what I do) experience, Linux patches tend to cause more grief due to differing dependencies. Please don't fall into the trap of believing that Linux (all varients) doesn't need regular patching :)
Dont worry I'm not that narrow minded ::)
I dont mind tinkering with something I haven't had to pay for to get it working, besides it increases my IT knowledge which since switching careers has been massively neglected.
I just dont beleive that I should have issues with an operating system or program that I have paid for, developers are paid to ensure that it works not release it and then patch it or release warning notes that it 'might not be compatible with x, y, z.....'
In an ideal world, no software would have faults. But TB's general rule of thumb is the more expensive the software, the more faults it has >:(
Matters little if its Windows, Linux or a proper Unix.
I guess I am (un)lucky enough to have to deal with multiple OSes - Windows, various Linux and proper Unix - on a daily basis, so can generally pick out the most suitable for a given task/use. OOF runs on Linux, as it fits Linux's niche very well (low cost internet services). However, it also highlights the fundamental flaws in the Linux kernel (in this case made worse due to the architecture of the forum software we use). OOF could run on virtually any OS, but think Linux/Unix will always be the most suitable for it in its current form.
Oh, note that 'professional' Linux is far more expensive than virtually all versions of Windows (except Enterprise versions of Windows Server) ;)
-
I guess I am (un)lucky enough to have to deal with multiple OSes - Windows, various Linux and proper Unix - on a daily basis, so can generally pick out the most suitable for a given task/use. OOF runs on Linux, as it fits Linux's niche very well (low cost internet services). However, it also highlights the fundamental flaws in the Linux kernel (in this case made worse due to the architecture of the forum software we use). OOF could run on virtually any OS, but think Linux/Unix will always be the most suitable for it in its current form.
This is the key, IMHO. :y Having cut my teeth on embedded systems I know only too well that if your kernel doesn't fit the requirements of your application the whole system will be an inefficient kludge. Furthermore, if your hardware platform is fixed and doesn't allow you to throw RAM and MIPS at it until it works you are really up the creek without a paddle.
Doesn't really matter so much on a general purpose / desktop machine because you can throw resources at it until it works, the machine is not likely to be heavily loaded for more than a few seconds at a time and there is a wide range performance over which the machine is acceptable.
What surprises me is that it's so common to be using a general purpose operating system with a hugely complex kernel (I'd include all flavours of Windows / Linux / Unix here) in a single-purpose machine such as a web server. Surely a nice, simple RTOS that can implement a web server, PERL, PHP, a database client and a few other bits and pieces would make far more effective use of the machine's resources? It could specialise in processing 1500 byte blocks of RAM and chucking them at the network interfaces pretty much to the exclusion of anything else. Its simplicity would also make it more stable and more resilient to attack, surely?
Anyway, must stop waffling. :-[
Kevin
-
I guess I am (un)lucky enough to have to deal with multiple OSes - Windows, various Linux and proper Unix - on a daily basis, so can generally pick out the most suitable for a given task/use. OOF runs on Linux, as it fits Linux's niche very well (low cost internet services). However, it also highlights the fundamental flaws in the Linux kernel (in this case made worse due to the architecture of the forum software we use). OOF could run on virtually any OS, but think Linux/Unix will always be the most suitable for it in its current form.
This is the key, IMHO. :y Having cut my teeth on embedded systems I know only too well that if your kernel doesn't fit the requirements of your application the whole system will be an inefficient kludge. Furthermore, if your hardware platform is fixed and doesn't allow you to throw RAM and MIPS at it until it works you are really up the creek without a paddle.
Doesn't really matter so much on a general purpose / desktop machine because you can throw resources at it until it works, the machine is not likely to be heavily loaded for more than a few seconds at a time and there is a wide range performance over which the machine is acceptable.
What surprises me is that it's so common to be using a general purpose operating system with a hugely complex kernel (I'd include all flavours of Windows / Linux / Unix here) in a single-purpose machine such as a web server. Surely a nice, simple RTOS that can implement a web server, PERL, PHP, a database client and a few other bits and pieces would make far more effective use of the machine's resources? It could specialise in processing 1500 byte blocks of RAM and chucking them at the network interfaces pretty much to the exclusion of anything else. Its simplicity would also make it more stable and more resilient to attack, surely?
Anyway, must stop waffling. :-[
Kevin
And most likely be lower power requirements :y, where can I get one ;D
Trouble is, most servers now are not physical, but virtual. So that limits you to the OSes that the hypervisor can manage. Yes, *IF* such a RTOS became popular enough, the hypervisor vendors would build it in eventually, but we're in a chicken and egg scenario first. In the meantime though, low cost web hosts are going to throw httpd_lite or Apache onto an unsupported Linux variant on cheap, mostly unmanaged hardware.
-
And most likely be lower power requirements :y, where can I get one ;D
Trouble is, most servers now are not physical, but virtual. So that limits you to the OSes that the hypervisor can manage. Yes, *IF* such a RTOS became popular enough, the hypervisor vendors would build it in eventually, but we're in a chicken and egg scenario first. In the meantime though, low cost web hosts are going to throw httpd_lite or Apache onto an unsupported Linux variant on cheap, mostly unmanaged hardware.
Even better, because the management can be offloaded to a more user-friendly platform that can be in a separate VM that's not exposed to the internet.
To what extent does a Hypervisor have to support an OS, though, over and above emulating an empty PC? Network interfaces, I guess?
Kevin
-
To what extent does a Hypervisor have to support an OS, though, over and above emulating an empty PC? Network interfaces, I guess?
Its not quite an emulation of the hardware (in the true sense of an emulator), more a virtualisation of it, so the hypervisor has to be able to deal with how the virtual OS interacts with the hardware. Hence, generally, you cannot run an unsupported OS on a hypervisor, because modern OSes don't really use BIOS calls.
Additionally, with virtualisation (as opposed to emulation), the virtual OS's code runs natively on the hypervisor, so has to be the right architecture - eg, you're wasting your time trying to run Windows on a T2000 Coolthreads based hypervisor.
So to answer your query, the hypervisor has to be tweaked to accept a new virtual OS
-
HDD Diags fine
memory Diags fine.
once its booted its fine, but runs recovery every boot....
-
HDD Diags fine
memory Diags fine.
once its booted its fine, but runs recovery every boot....
Tried re-writing the MBR? :-/
Kevin
-
when booting the green 'progress' bar appears and goes round between 1 and 2 times....so dont think mbr would make any difference.
-
maybe like it could be a bad sector on the HDD and that the update was a coincidence?