Ubuntu

In an attempt to familiarize myself with linux, I downloaded and installed Ubuntu 6.06. Installed it and it works just fine, but for one thing. I can't get any, and I mean any, programs to run at all. So to you linux gurus out there, am I overlooking something? This OS seems very promising, once I can get it to work correctly. I also am unable to access any drive but the partition the OS has created, says I don't have the permissions to do that. Any input/suggestions are welcome.

How ya doing, buddy?

By any programs, I mean programs that I have downloaded, such as ZSNES and Google Earth. The programs that came with the OS work fine, I meant programs not preinstalled simply do not work. On occasion, it may say they are opening on the bar at the bottom. Now that I am on a faster connection, here are some screenshots of errors I get. All drives show up as they should. But when I try to access the main one I get an error. I have tried to change the path that it uses but it will not save the change for some reason.

Most amazing jew boots

Taking a closer look at the programs I have downloaded, they are classified as executables. Now, before the flame wars begin, I have a simple question. If Linux cannot run executables, then why the fuck are the Linux specific versions executables?

Originally Posted by Merv Burger

He's also very silly to think his Windows software will work in Linux like nothing. That's why it's called "Linux" and not "Windows."

It is silly to try to run a Linux version of a program that has been ported from Windows? I know Linux is not Windows, but to say that the program runs on Linux and in reality it does not is just a tad bit misleading, don't you think?

Quote:

Sources.list

deb-src http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper main restricted

## Major bug fix updates produced after the final release of the
## distribution.
deb http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-updates main restricted
deb-src http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-updates main restricted

## Uncomment the following two lines to add software from the 'universe'
## repository.
## N.B. software from this repository is ENTIRELY UNSUPPORTED by the Ubuntu
## team, and may not be under a free licence. Please satisfy yourself as to
## your rights to use the software. Also, please note that software in
## universe WILL NOT receive any review or updates from the Ubuntu security
## team.
deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper universe main restricted
# deb-src http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper universe

## Uncomment the following two lines to add software from the 'backports'
## repository.
## N.B. software from this repository may not have been tested as
## extensively as that contained in the main release, although it includes
## newer versions of some applications which may provide useful features.
## Also, please note that software in backports WILL NOT receive any review
## or updates from the Ubuntu security team.
# deb http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-backports main restricted universe multiverse
# deb-src http://au.archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ dapper-backports main restricted universe multiverse

deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security main restricted
deb-src http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security main restricted
# deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security universe
# deb-src http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu dapper-security universe
http://wine.budgetdedicated.com/apt/...ll/Packages.gz

Quote:

fstab

# /etc/fstab: static file system information.
#
# <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass>
proc /proc proc defaults 0 0
/dev/hdb2 / ext3 defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1
/dev/hdb5 none swap sw 0 0
/dev/hdc /media/cdrom0 udf,iso9660 user,noauto 0 0

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Well I do notice 1 problem. Line 33 of sources.list does not have the # deb in front of the website. But I apparently am not the owner because I do not have the permissions to edit it.

Quote:

Hm, according to your fstab, only the root (hdb2) and the swap partitions (hdb5) are mounted upon boot. Could you post the output of "sudo fdisk -l" ?

Disk /dev/hda: 200.0 GB, 200049647616 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 24321 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hda1 * 1 24320 195350368+ 7 HPFS/NTFS

Disk /dev/hdb: 40.0 GB, 40020664320 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 4865 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes

Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hdb1 1 4303 34563816 7 HPFS/NTFS
/dev/hdb2 * 4304 4837 4289355 83 Linux
/dev/hdb3 4838 4865 224910 5 Extended
/dev/hdb5 4838 4865 224878+ 82 Linux swap / Solaris

I am guessing it is not mounting this drive because I do not have the permission to access it. The owner seems to be the "root" account. I don't see how I can take ownership. I put my account in the same group as root (hey figured it was worth trying). Now, nothing works of course.

Update: resetted to previous settings. So I guess what will answer most of my problems is, how do I gain ownership? Under Users and Groups I have full privileges.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Added all of that stuff in. Now, it says it can't mount the drives due to the following errors:

error: device /dev/hda1 is not removable

error: could not execute pmount

Double Post:

Originally Posted by Merv Burger

Or he could install ext2 IFS in Windows which will add ext2/3 partition support in Windows.

That's what I do, and as far as I can tell, it works just fine.

Did that. The partitions now show in Windows, but says they need to be formatted.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Magic

Could you please post the contents of your fstab file? Either copy/paste it from a terminal or just upload the file. Uh, I guess it'd also help to see what's currently mounted and where. Bring up a terminal window and type the following:

df -h                   //and copy/paste the resulting text
OR
df -h > mountpoints       //and upload the resulting file "mountpoints"

For running applications, what are you doing? Are you downloading source code and compiling it? Are you downloading binaries? Unfortunately, I've never used Ubuntu (and I hated Debian) so I can't really help if it's an issue with their packaging system, but if your system is set up properly then there's no reason you shouldn't just be able to compile and run ZSNES.

btw, Gentoo's website is a pretty good resource for Linux information in general, although a lot of the documentation deals strictly with their "packaging system" called Portage. The nice thing about Gentoo, however, is that it mostly consists of scripts. I think I probably learned more about Linux just by installing Gentoo than I did from reading Linux for Dummies or from training courses in school. It may seem a little more complicated than Ubuntu, but I think you'll find it a learning experience. Just stay away from their graphical installer, as it's not quite ready yet.

Text:
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hdb2 4.1G 2.0G 1.9G 53% /
varrun 503M 80K 503M 1% /var/run
varlock 503M 4.0K 503M 1% /var/lock
udev 503M 120K 503M 1% /dev
devshm 503M 0 503M 0% /dev/shm
lrm 503M 22M 482M 5% /lib/modules/2.6.15-23-amd64-generic/volatile
/dev/hdc 4.2G 4.2G 0 100% /media/cdrom0

And yes, the files I am trying to run are binaries.

UPDATE: Windows finally recognizes the partitions. As such, I went in and edited the files and now I have full access to the drives. One problem down.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Magic

And....your fstab?

# /etc/fstab: static file system information.

#

# <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass>

proc /proc proc defaults 0 0

/dev/hdb2 / ext3 defaults,errors=remount-ro 0 1

/dev/hdb5 none swap sw 0 0

/dev/hdc /media/cdrom0 udf,iso9660 user,noauto 0 0

/dev/hda1 /media/hda1 ntfs defaults,nls=utf8,umask=007,gid=46 0 1

/dev/hdb1 /media/hdb1 ntfs defaults,nls=utf8,umask=007,gid=46 0 1

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

@ dragon_87
How is it going?
Did you get some software installed with apt/Synaptic? Are your NTFS partitions showing up all right in /media/hda1 and /media/hdb1 ?

Well, yes and no. The main thing I am trying to run atm is wine. The link given to install the package gives me a 404 error. So I went and downloaded it somewhere else. Now I have a wine-0.9.15.tar.bz2 sitting on the desktop. So I open it and extract the folder. I am lost from here as to how to get it working. The NTFS partitions are working fine.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

Why bother with that tar.bz2 file, Wine's available through apt.

The reason why I am bothering with the tar.bz2 file is because when I use the site given at winehq to install the program using Synaptic, I get a 404 not found error.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

Hm, those sources work fine for me. Guess there's still something wrong with your sources.list.

Btw, I wouldn't bother with Wine at your level of experience anyway. It takes some time to set up, results tend to be unrewarding and it really distracts from the most obvious task at hand: Finding real (read: Linux native) replacements for your Windows software. Wine's nice to get that one tool to run which just doesen't seem to have a Linux equivalent in a million years. (Strangely enough, Avidemux became very usable by the time I got VirtualDubMod running with Wine).

Anyway, I'd really move Wine way down on your to-do list.

Well I no longer get that error after switching it from binary to source. But compiling this thing is a pain in the ass. Running "apt-get --build source wine" ends with this error:

checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details.
make: *** [config.status] Error 77
Build command 'cd wine-0.9.15~winehq0~ubuntu~6.06 && dpkg-buildpackage -b -uc' failed.
E: Child process failed

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Cyrus XIII

Forget about that, just remembered that Wine is x86 architecture only.

So in order for it to work, I would need to install the x86 version of ubuntu?
That kinda shoots down trying to run stuff on a 64bit os but I was thinking that it would be backwards compatible with x86. But if it isn't...then that probably explains why the linux version emulators are not working either.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.