On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 01:30:36 -0400, jim wrote:

>> And yet another reason to avoid linux is conceited smart-assed
>> know-it-all geek assholes like yourself.

> It is certainly a turn-off for those just trying to get into Linux. And, I
> suspect, has something to do with the limited number of Linux users.

Which doesn't include you, doofus.

Bugger off, Win-droid.



--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
Now filtering out all posts originating from Google Groups.
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

johnny bobby bee wrote:
> jim wrote:
>> I want to like Linux. I really do. But, I find it a lot like driving
>> a car. If I had to work on my car as much as I have had to work on
>> Linux distros that I have tried and I got as much out of it as I have
>> gotten out of them I'd walk and get there faster.
>
> Funny you should mention a car analogy:
>
> If Windows were a car:
>
> 1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
> 2. Every time they painted new lines on the road, you would have to buy
> a new car.
> 3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You
> would have to pull over to the side of the road, close all of the
> windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you
> could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
> 4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause
> your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would
> have to reinstall the engine.
> 5. Only one person at a time could use the car unless you bought
> "CarNT," but then you would have to buy more seats.
> 6. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable,
> five times as fast and twice as easy to drive -- but it would only run
> on five percent of the roads.
> 7. The oil, water temperature and alternator warning lights would all be
> replaced by a single "general protect ion fault" warning light.
> 8. The airbag system would ask, "Are you sure?" before deploying.
> 9. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out
> and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door
> handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the antenna.
> 10. GM would require all car buyers to also purchase a deluxe set of
> Rand McNally Road maps (now a GM subsidiary), even though they neither
> need nor want them. Attempting to delete this option would immediately
> cause the car's performance to diminish by 50 percent or more. Moreover,
> GM would become a target for investigation by the Justice Department.
> 11. Every time GM introducd a new car, car buyers would have to learn to
> drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the
> same manner as the old car.
> 12. You'd have to press the "start" button to turn the engine off.
>



Sir, I thank you.


You totally just made my day.

On Sat, 31 May 2008 22:40:23 -0400, jim wrote:

> For example....
>
> I downloaded BackTrack 3 and ran the Live CD just fine. It detects my
> USB wireless card and everything.
>
> So, I wanted to make a more permanent installation of BackTrack 3 to run
> when I wanted and to use it to learn more about Linux in general.
>
> I followed directions on creating the vmware virtual machine manually
> (to override the SCSI disk in favor of IDE) and I launched the new VM
> using the ISO as my CD drive and allowing the VM to boot into the live
> BackTrack 3 CD.
>
> Once in, I created 2 partitions (hda1 and hda2) to use for my BackTrack
> 3 install and swap files, and I ran mkfs.ext3, mkswap, mkdir and mount
> to create my environment and prepare for install.
>
> I then ran the BackTrack 3 install (which does state that it has not
> been tested - although the current version came out in December of
> 2007).
>
> But, when I rebooted, instead of simply launching the way the Live CD
> did, I now get a red box asking me what OS to load (only BackTrack is
> shown) and I have to log in with root/toor and launch the kde graphical
> desktop manually.
>
> None of that bothers me.
>
> But, what does bother me is that the vmware installed version will not
> see my USB wireless device when the live cd version sees it just fine.
> WTF?
>
> I've spent 7 hours with this distro - trying to get it into a VM so that
> I could actually save things to the drive and use it as a desktop and
> I'm no closer now than I was 7 hours ago.
>
> THIS is why Windows has such a great following. Is Windows insecure?
> Yes. Is Windows bloated and slow (esp. Vista)? Yes. But, can you get
> things to work in Windows faster and easier than in Linux? HELL YES!!
>
> I want to like Linux. I really do. But, I find it a lot like driving a
> car. If I had to work on my car as much as I have had to work on Linux
> distros that I have tried and I got as much out of it as I have gotten
> out of them I'd walk and get there faster.
>
> jim

When you first started learning windows did you install it over an other
operating system and used something like vmware to run it?

If you take it in steps and not try and do it all in one shot then your going
to increase your chances of success. Just through an extra drive in the box
and run dual boot. Or if you cannot do that find another box.

Of course we are willing to help you. Its much better if you learn on your
own. Your gonna learn more and alot faster then. BUt alot of people are
here to help you. We are not against you. We want to see you succeed.

As for me, I love tinkering. I also love a free operating system that does
everything I like. You will too.

Of course, I would use something more popular (redhat,fedora,ubuntu,ect..) and
choose default installs. Then play with it.

good Luck,

coffee

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:%BS0k.2102$UF5.1454@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:KwP0k.1732$8X4.476@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> It went MUCH, MUCH smoother than the dual boot thing. I am now running
>> Backtracker 3 off a 2GB USB flash drive - and the performance is ****
>> near as good as it was dual booting it.
>>
>> Nice.
>>
>> But, it does not persist my changes. Any ideas on how I can get
>> backtracker 3 on USB to persist my changes to the USB drive?
>
> It's a few hours later and I'm stuck at "mounting aufs on union failed".
>
> I am attempting to follow the directions at http://maddhat.com/?p=23 and
> http://n00bhacker.blogspot.com/searc...20Installation.
>
> The first site's directions got me to the point that I could have
> backtrack 3 running from my USB, but no changes were being saved.
>
> The second tries to relay information to get your data to be persistent.
>
> So far, mine isn't persistent. In fact, because of the "mounting aufs on
> union failed" error, bt3 no longer loads from the USB drive.
>
> Well, I'm tired as hell and going to get some sleep now.
>
> Who knew penguins were so ****ed slippery?

Linux zealots not withstanding, I got the ****ed thing to work!

It's odd...being so pleased that the OS is just working as needed from a USB
drive. A real new experience for me.

But, that's why I'm here....to learn new stuff with Linux!

To hell with sleep, I've got Linux apps to get working! (jk - I really hope
the ****ed things "just work" -- I'll let you know...)

jim

"coffee" <coffee@the-bunker.com> wrote in message
news:LMadndaXbvLwLdnVnZ2dnUVZ_rXinZ2d@giganews.com ...
> On Sat, 31 May 2008 22:40:23 -0400, jim wrote:
>
>> For example....
>>
>> I downloaded BackTrack 3 and ran the Live CD just fine. It detects my
>> USB wireless card and everything.
>>
>> So, I wanted to make a more permanent installation of BackTrack 3 to run
>> when I wanted and to use it to learn more about Linux in general.
>>
>> I followed directions on creating the vmware virtual machine manually
>> (to override the SCSI disk in favor of IDE) and I launched the new VM
>> using the ISO as my CD drive and allowing the VM to boot into the live
>> BackTrack 3 CD.
>>
>> Once in, I created 2 partitions (hda1 and hda2) to use for my BackTrack
>> 3 install and swap files, and I ran mkfs.ext3, mkswap, mkdir and mount
>> to create my environment and prepare for install.
>>
>> I then ran the BackTrack 3 install (which does state that it has not
>> been tested - although the current version came out in December of
>> 2007).
>>
>> But, when I rebooted, instead of simply launching the way the Live CD
>> did, I now get a red box asking me what OS to load (only BackTrack is
>> shown) and I have to log in with root/toor and launch the kde graphical
>> desktop manually.
>>
>> None of that bothers me.
>>
>> But, what does bother me is that the vmware installed version will not
>> see my USB wireless device when the live cd version sees it just fine.
>> WTF?
>>
>> I've spent 7 hours with this distro - trying to get it into a VM so that
>> I could actually save things to the drive and use it as a desktop and
>> I'm no closer now than I was 7 hours ago.
>>
>> THIS is why Windows has such a great following. Is Windows insecure?
>> Yes. Is Windows bloated and slow (esp. Vista)? Yes. But, can you get
>> things to work in Windows faster and easier than in Linux? HELL YES!!
>>
>> I want to like Linux. I really do. But, I find it a lot like driving a
>> car. If I had to work on my car as much as I have had to work on Linux
>> distros that I have tried and I got as much out of it as I have gotten
>> out of them I'd walk and get there faster.
>>
>> jim
>
> When you first started learning windows did you install it over an other
> operating system and used something like vmware to run it?

No. I ran it from the recommended hardware - just like I ran Linux from the
intended hardware the first few times I tried Ubuntu, PCLinux and Knoppix.

Admittedly I pretty much stuck to the desktop and installed just some basic
apps, but they worked well as long as you didn't try and get too fancy (like
Windows in a lot of ways).

> If you take it in steps and not try and do it all in one shot then your
> going
> to increase your chances of success. Just through an extra drive in the
> box
> and run dual boot. Or if you cannot do that find another box.

I ran dual boot, but I need to be able to give a demonstration that will
have a little more impact if I can whip out a USB drive and do my mojo on
any available PC.

> Of course we are willing to help you. Its much better if you learn on your
> own. Your gonna learn more and alot faster then. BUt alot of people are
> here to help you. We are not against you. We want to see you succeed.

Actually, that's good to hear. Sealots (be they Linux or Windows or Mac)
can make learning the new stuff even more daunting than it already seems to
us n00bs.

> As for me, I love tinkering. I also love a free operating system that does
> everything I like. You will too.

I do like tinkering. Unfortunately my time is limited because I run a small
company that specializes in Windows-based networking for small businesses
and I need to make every miunute count.

I'd love to be able to take the time to just play and learn one day. But,
today is not that day.

> Of course, I would use something more popular (redhat,fedora,ubuntu,ect..)
> and
> choose default installs. Then play with it.

I really thought about using Ubuntu for the wide support. If I could get
all of the packages from Backtrack 3 into a Ubuntu install I'd give it a go.

Then again, there are probably drivers in the Backtrack 3 distro that are
not included in Ubuntu (mainly the RT73 wireless adapter drivers and other
wireless goodies). Being a Linux n00b, I wouldn't even know how to tell
what drivers I need or may be missing, much less where to find them and how
to install them.


> good Luck,

Thanks so much! I'll keep you posted on my progress. I have the USB drive
working and saving changes now. Now, I get to play with the apps that I
need to learn in order to do my demo.

> coffee

Cool - I celebrated at Starbucks about 10:15 pm -- after I really understood
(and documented) how to make a Backtrack 3 USB that saves changes.

I'm on a roll now!

BTW, the one thing I REALLY love about Linux is the control given to the end
user over the system. Does it need some stuff to make it easier? Sure, but
Windows needs some stuff too.

jim

Dan C wrote:

> Run along and bother the other Win-droids, dimwit.

Dan. Â*Stupid people like you shouldn't make fools of themselves publicly.
You revel in your rude stupidity - after all, you are American - and so
the grown-ups just consign your posts to their kill files. Â*You are both a
waste of bandwidth and of air. Â*If you have nothing useful to say, consider
not saying anything If you find yourself unable to do that then go
and post elsewhere, with the rest of the stupid children.

C.

On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 01:30:36 -0400, "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote:

>
><joeaverage@invalid.com> wrote in message
>news:6k07445fv77cgepqc8bqelpvpi0k2rhp26@4ax.com.. .
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:39:34 -0500, Dan C
>> <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:03:44 -0500, joeaverage wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>> I guess some people are born geeks, but for me, I like simplicity.
>>>
>>>So, you were born stupid.
>>>
>>>> Computers are toys to some people, and I find most Linux users seem to
>>>> approach them as toys. I do enjoy spending a little time online, but
>>>> my computer is mostly just a tool used to get information off the web,
>>>> send email, type letters, and manage my digital photos. I'll never be
>>>> a geek. so I'll never use Linux again !!!!
>>>
>>>And stayed that way until this point in your life.
>>>
>>>Bugger off, Win-droid.
>>
>> And yet another reason to avoid linux is conceited smart-assed
>> know-it-all geek assholes like yourself.
>
>It is certainly a turn-off for those just trying to get into Linux. And, I
>suspect, has something to do with the limited number of Linux users.

I surely do agree. There are idiots on all newsgroups, but it sure
seems that Linux groups have more than the average. It seems there
are many who want to shove Linux down the throats of every Windows
user, but when they ask for help they are called stupid and harassed.
We all got to learn somehow, whether its Linux, Windows, or how to
build a house, or doctor a wound.
>
>If the Linux community really wanted to grow they'd do a better job of
>self-policing these assholes.

I policed THIS one myself...... Killfiled
>
>I thank you for your point of view and for daring to post it here.
>
You're welcome. It's my honest feelings based on my short unpleasant
experience with Linux. I gave it my best, but it's not for me.

I do wonder one thing. I am not sure how many different versions of
Linux exist, but I know there are very many. That alone is confusing,
but I realize that anyone can release their own Linux version. Ok,
I'll accept that. But here's what I dont understand. Why is it that
there is not an "Install and Go" version? Microsoft produces a lot of
garbage, and their Vista seems to have proven that (I have not tried
it). But at the same time, MS has created an operating system that
almost any average person can install and use without much effort.
Simply stick a CD in a drive, answer a few questions, and an hour
later the computer is ready to use, which includes all the connected
hardware (due to PNP) is setup and ready to go. For that, I give MS a
thumbs up. THIS is what most people want. Most people are too busy
to tinker and read all sorts of geek-speak, which they wont even
understand. Most people want to USE the computer, to get online, to
word process, to handle their finances, etc. maybe even play a few
games. But most people dont want to learn all the ins and outs of
computers. They either dont have the time, or dont have the interest.

If we did a survey of all computer users, I'd guess that 90% or more
fit this category. They simply do not want to learn anything about
the computer, except how to get on the web, or use MS Word.

From what I've seen, Linux is NOT intended for this majority of
computer users..... WHY NOT?
With all the versions available, how come there is none that is a
simple plug and play, insert CD and use the fully working computer an
hour later. The truth seems to be that Linux is only made for the
geeks and those who look at computers as toys, rather than tools.

That does not just mean installing the OS, but a version that includes
all the most used software, such as web browser, word procesor, paint
program, calculator, database, email and newsgroup software,
utilities, system maintenance, and more..... Windows does all of
this. Why not Linux? I'm not asking for more bloatware, such as XP
was, and Vista seems to be even more, but just the basics.

I personally think that Windows98se was the best MS ever made. It had
all the features, all the needed software, and was easy to install and
use, without excessive bloat. Since then, everything added to Windows
has been mostly bloat. The only good things they did was make the USB
support better, and cut the need for most drivers. Otherwise, it's
just bloat and more bloat, and the need for more power to do the same
tasks.

I'd really like an alternative to Windows. I dont care to give my
money to MS, and the fact they no longer support my own personal
choice, using Win98, really pisses me off. I paid for the software
and I should be able to use it as long as I want, WITH SUPPORT.

If Linux came with a install and go CD, complete with all the common
programs, I'd likely be using it. Then little by little I'd add
programs, and make my personal modifications. For example, I hate
Outlook Express. So I got Eudora and Agent for email and news. I
deleted Outlook Exp completely. But when I first went online, it was
there ready to use right off the install CD.

Linux needs to get on the ball and create a version that anyone can
install and use immediately. Until then, they are eliminating 90% or
more of the population from using their software.

(One question I never got answered. Is there any version of Linux
that has the ability to run Dos programs? People of my age group
still use some Dos apps. I dont want to have to dual boot to use a
dos app.). Just curious.

Joe

>jim
>

On 2008-06-03, joeaverage@invalid.com <joeaverage@invalid.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 01:30:36 -0400, "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote:
> If Linux came with a install and go CD, complete with all the common
> programs, I'd likely be using it. Then little by little I'd add
> programs, and make my personal modifications. For example, I hate
> Outlook Express. So I got Eudora and Agent for email and news. I
> deleted Outlook Exp completely. But when I first went online, it was
> there ready to use right off the install CD.
>
> Linux needs to get on the ball and create a version that anyone can
> install and use immediately. Until then, they are eliminating 90% or
> more of the population from using their software.

Since quite a few years, the main distros (I use SuSE) come very close
to this. On the machines I use the installation of all hardware has
been automatic and easy for years. And it comes with everything you
need. Ok, it doesn't have the *same* programs that are popular on
Windows (except Firefox), but it has nice replacements for nearly
everything and SuSE has a nice booklet explaining the basics.

So, you have to invest some time finding and learning your favorite
applications to browse, e-mail, manage photos, music, burn cds, etc.
but than you should be all set. You keep having trouble if you want
to run popular PC games. Some run using Wine, sometimes without any
trouble, sometimes with some trouble and sometimes not at all. You
also have trouble connecting to some phones, etc. and other
nonstandard hardware. The trouble here is that no hardware vendor can
afford not to support Windows, but many do not support Linux. Some
even try hard to make life difficult to create a Linux driver
(e.g. ipods, though the Linux comunity does get it done). That won't
change until Linux gets big enough. On the other hand, being small
means and generally more secure by design avoids most of the virus
nonsense and having to run all that security software saves money,
time and provides a lot of extra speed.

> (One question I never got answered. Is there any version of Linux
> that has the ability to run Dos programs? People of my age group
> still use some Dos apps. I dont want to have to dual boot to use a
> dos app.). Just curious.

dosemu. Didn't use it for may years though.

--- Jan

<joeaverage@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:v2t944dc1m4oeg4iu4m26l5aianc0g83ia@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 01:30:36 -0400, "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote:
>
>>
>><joeaverage@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>news:6k07445fv77cgepqc8bqelpvpi0k2rhp26@4ax.com. ..
>>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:39:34 -0500, Dan C
>>> <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:03:44 -0500, joeaverage wrote:
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>> I guess some people are born geeks, but for me, I like simplicity.
>>>>
>>>>So, you were born stupid.
>>>>
>>>>> Computers are toys to some people, and I find most Linux users seem to
>>>>> approach them as toys. I do enjoy spending a little time online, but
>>>>> my computer is mostly just a tool used to get information off the web,
>>>>> send email, type letters, and manage my digital photos. I'll never be
>>>>> a geek. so I'll never use Linux again !!!!
>>>>
>>>>And stayed that way until this point in your life.
>>>>
>>>>Bugger off, Win-droid.
>>>
>>> And yet another reason to avoid linux is conceited smart-assed
>>> know-it-all geek assholes like yourself.
>>
>>It is certainly a turn-off for those just trying to get into Linux. And,
>>I
>>suspect, has something to do with the limited number of Linux users.
>
> I surely do agree. There are idiots on all newsgroups, but it sure
> seems that Linux groups have more than the average. It seems there
> are many who want to shove Linux down the throats of every Windows
> user, but when they ask for help they are called stupid and harassed.
> We all got to learn somehow, whether its Linux, Windows, or how to
> build a house, or doctor a wound.
>>
>>If the Linux community really wanted to grow they'd do a better job of
>>self-policing these assholes.
>
> I policed THIS one myself...... Killfiled
>>
>>I thank you for your point of view and for daring to post it here.
>>
> You're welcome. It's my honest feelings based on my short unpleasant
> experience with Linux. I gave it my best, but it's not for me.
>

<snipped for brevity>

> Linux needs to get on the ball and create a version that anyone can
> install and use immediately. Until then, they are eliminating 90% or
> more of the population from using their software.

There are some distros that are basically install and run. One of the
simnplest versions that I ever tried was Linspire. It looks like windows
and (for $50) you get a "Click-N-Run" applications library that you can
search through and simply click the ones you want and they are installed for
you.

Linspire comes with OpenOffice already installed (a great replacement for MS
Office) and you can use Thunderbird (a free download) for your email client.
It's as easy as Outlook and even more powerful. It has proprietary drivers
installed (which most Linux distros shun - at the expense of usability) and
has plug-and-play to make adding hardware as simple as plugging into a
Windows box.

I'd really suggest that you try out Linspire before giving up on Linux
completely. Check out what you get for your $49.95 at
http://www.linspire.com/products_linspire_whatis.php . It's a real bargin
when you compare it to Microsoft's offerings.

And, if you want, you can even try their free version before plunking down
your $50 for the frilly version. The free version can be downloaded at
http://www.freespire.org/.

I am learning Backtrack because it has security penetration tools used to
test network security -- it's a work thing.

> (One question I never got answered. Is there any version of Linux
> that has the ability to run Dos programs? People of my age group
> still use some Dos apps. I dont want to have to dual boot to use a
> dos app.). Just curious.

There is a product called DOSEmu at http://dosemu.sourceforge.net/ that
claims to do just that. I'd get myself a copy of Linspire and DOSEmu and
give it one more shot before giving up completely. If it works out, you've
gained a lot.

jim

<joeaverage@invalid.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 01:30:36 -0400, "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote:
>Why is it that there is not an "Install and Go" version?

There are lot of versions of Windows out there; why is it there is not a
"fast and stable" version? See, it all depends on what your priorities
are.

As for an "install and go" version of Linux, of course there are
several, assuming you have compatible hardware. Fedora installed and
went last time I tried it. I suspect CentOS does. I suspect Ubuntu
does.

>The truth seems to be that Linux is only made for the geeks and those
>who look at computers as toys, rather than tools.

Not quite. Linux is only made BY the geeks. It just so happens that
geeks appreciate their work the most.

>Windows [includes all this software]. Why not Linux?

It does, for the record.

>I personally think that Windows98se was the best MS ever made.

You'll probably get a lot of agreement on this newsgroup for that. :)

>Linux needs to get on the ball and create a version that anyone can
>install and use immediately.

Oh yeah? Or what will happen? All of us geeks will be destined to use
systems we love forever? That would be just terrible.

No, the worst thing that can happen is that Linux doesn't provide enough
competition for Microsoft, and so non-geeks continue to pay out the nose
for software that is crap. Sorry!

>Is there any version of Linux that has the ability to run Dos programs?

All major Linux distros can run DOS apps:

http://dosemu.sourceforge.net/

You might be able to run your Windows apps with WINE:

http://www.winehq.org/

And you can run your Amiga apps with UAE:

http://uae.coresystems.de/

And you can run your C64 apps with VICE:

http://www.viceteam.org/

And you can run your Apple 2 apps with KEGS:

http://kegs.sourceforge.net/

And you can run your Osborne apps with some CP/M emulator, I'm certain.

-Beej

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:T641k.7123$Dm5.6042@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:%BS0k.2102$UF5.1454@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:KwP0k.1732$8X4.476@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>
>>> It went MUCH, MUCH smoother than the dual boot thing. I am now running
>>> Backtracker 3 off a 2GB USB flash drive - and the performance is ****
>>> near as good as it was dual booting it.
>>>
>>> Nice.
>>>
>>> But, it does not persist my changes. Any ideas on how I can get
>>> backtracker 3 on USB to persist my changes to the USB drive?
>>
>> It's a few hours later and I'm stuck at "mounting aufs on union failed".
>>
>> I am attempting to follow the directions at http://maddhat.com/?p=23 and
>> http://n00bhacker.blogspot.com/searc...20Installation.
>>
>> The first site's directions got me to the point that I could have
>> backtrack 3 running from my USB, but no changes were being saved.
>>
>> The second tries to relay information to get your data to be persistent.
>>
>> So far, mine isn't persistent. In fact, because of the "mounting aufs on
>> union failed" error, bt3 no longer loads from the USB drive.
>>
>> Well, I'm tired as hell and going to get some sleep now.
>>
>> Who knew penguins were so ****ed slippery?
>
> Linux zealots not withstanding, I got the ****ed thing to work!
>
> It's odd...being so pleased that the OS is just working as needed from a
> USB drive. A real new experience for me.
>
> But, that's why I'm here....to learn new stuff with Linux!
>
> To hell with sleep, I've got Linux apps to get working! (jk - I really
> hope the ****ed things "just work" -- I'll let you know...)

Gslapt Package Manager isn't working as advertised - I was getting errors
when I tried to run update in Gslapt. So, after trying arcane command line
stuff that actually made it worse, I found a simple solution (slow - but
simple) to updating Gslapt.

To update Gslapt do the following...
run K>BackTrack>Penetration>FastTrack
press 1 and enter
press 5 and enter
press 1 and enter

The update process starts, and you go to bed or fishing. It has been 2
hours and it is about half way through downloading 150 mb of updates. (No,
it isn't my ISP or bandwidth. I am a big torrent fan and have no issues
dling just about anything I want -- and a few things I wish I hadn't ;) ).

Look, I'm not bashing Linux when I wonder just why the hell the Gslapt
Package Manager can't update itself. Wow.....that seems just plain stupid.

I was also thinking that a central package repository supported (financially
and otherwise) by a consortium of Linux-base companies like Novell, Ubuntu,
RedHat, Linspire, etc. could have a simple interface like the one in
Linspire's Click-N-Run application, would be able to support all of the
participating distros and could have awesome bandwidth to allow for faster
downloads by all distros.

Wonder why they haven't done that to make the Linux community stronger?

jim

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:07:07 -0400, jim wrote:

> Then again, there are probably drivers in the Backtrack 3 distro that
> are not included in Ubuntu (mainly the RT73 wireless adapter drivers and
> other wireless goodies).

The rt73 is now supported by the rt2x00 drivers, which have been in the
main kernel tree since January.

All the recently released distros therefore support this wireless chipset
by default, and the D-Link DWL-G122 C1 (which uses the rt73) now comes in
a new box with the Tux logo and "Linux Support" printed on the front.

My experience is that it works under Ubuntu 8.04 and Slackware 12.1, that
is, everything I've tried it with.

On 2008-06-01 12:23, jim wrote:

>
> I didn't come here to flame Linux,

Well, the subject "Nothing is simple in Linux" is
nothing else then a start of a long flame war.

You could have asked why vmware can't see your USB.

Why are you digging in so deep things anyway?
If you will compare with windows, at least buy a
boxed retail version with support.

I don't know the release you described, but starting
to change the default things is not a good start for beginners,
Linux is fun, but no toy, you have the option to mess everything.

I don't claim everything is perfect on all machines, but if you
are a beginner, wait a bit before you try your own ideas.

The stupid car thing:

On your first driving lesson the instructions say start with the first gear,
but you have seen your dad starting on second gear so you do it and the
motor stop. Try something simpler first.

/bb

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 05:58:22 +0100, Christopher Hunter wrote:

> Dan. *Stupid people like you shouldn't make fools of themselves publicly.
> You revel in your rude stupidity - after all, you are American - and so

**** off, Euro-boy. Your anti-American stupidity is showing (again).


.-"" '.' ""-.
." .'. ".
/| .Q. |
/ | :|: |\
/ / . . \"\
/ / ,/: :\, \ "\
/ / / (_i_) \ \ "\
/ / /" | | "\ \ |
| / /" '-' "\ \."
|| / |/ \ \ \ \
|| ,'-./ \ |--. |
| \ \ / |
|\ \ | | /
\_^-\ \ | /
\ \ / /
\ \ / /
__\ \", / /__
/- | | \ / / ( -\
`~-._` ) / | -' _.-'



--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
Now filtering out all posts originating from Google Groups.
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

"jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
news:Zj81k.5593$8X4.3451@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
> news:T641k.7123$Dm5.6042@bignews9.bellsouth.net...
>>
>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>> news:%BS0k.2102$UF5.1454@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> "jim" <jim@home.net> wrote in message
>>> news:KwP0k.1732$8X4.476@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>>>>
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It went MUCH, MUCH smoother than the dual boot thing. I am now running
>>>> Backtracker 3 off a 2GB USB flash drive - and the performance is ****
>>>> near as good as it was dual booting it.
>>>>
>>>> Nice.
>>>>
>>>> But, it does not persist my changes. Any ideas on how I can get
>>>> backtracker 3 on USB to persist my changes to the USB drive?
>>>
>>> It's a few hours later and I'm stuck at "mounting aufs on union failed".
>>>
>>> I am attempting to follow the directions at http://maddhat.com/?p=23 and
>>> http://n00bhacker.blogspot.com/searc...20Installation.
>>>
>>> The first site's directions got me to the point that I could have
>>> backtrack 3 running from my USB, but no changes were being saved.
>>>
>>> The second tries to relay information to get your data to be persistent.
>>>
>>> So far, mine isn't persistent. In fact, because of the "mounting aufs
>>> on union failed" error, bt3 no longer loads from the USB drive.
>>>
>>> Well, I'm tired as hell and going to get some sleep now.
>>>
>>> Who knew penguins were so ****ed slippery?
>>
>> Linux zealots not withstanding, I got the ****ed thing to work!
>>
>> It's odd...being so pleased that the OS is just working as needed from a
>> USB drive. A real new experience for me.
>>
>> But, that's why I'm here....to learn new stuff with Linux!
>>
>> To hell with sleep, I've got Linux apps to get working! (jk - I really
>> hope the ****ed things "just work" -- I'll let you know...)
>
> Gslapt Package Manager isn't working as advertised - I was getting errors
> when I tried to run update in Gslapt. So, after trying arcane command
> line stuff that actually made it worse, I found a simple solution (slow -
> but simple) to updating Gslapt.
>
> To update Gslapt do the following...
> run K>BackTrack>Penetration>FastTrack
> press 1 and enter
> press 5 and enter
> press 1 and enter
>
> The update process starts, and you go to bed or fishing. It has been 2
> hours and it is about half way through downloading 150 mb of updates.
> (No, it isn't my ISP or bandwidth. I am a big torrent fan and have no
> issues dling just about anything I want -- and a few things I wish I
> hadn't ;) ).
>
> Look, I'm not bashing Linux when I wonder just why the hell the Gslapt
> Package Manager can't update itself. Wow.....that seems just plain
> stupid.
>
> I was also thinking that a central package repository supported
> (financially and otherwise) by a consortium of Linux-base companies like
> Novell, Ubuntu, RedHat, Linspire, etc. could have a simple interface like
> the one in Linspire's Click-N-Run application, would be able to support
> all of the participating distros and could have awesome bandwidth to allow
> for faster downloads by all distros.
>
> Wonder why they haven't done that to make the Linux community stronger?

Latest - after taking a nap and letting the installs finish, Gslapt closes
(crashes?) when I click on "Update". No error messages. It just leaves the
scene.

As usual, no simple "How to fix" can be found for this problem.

Still looking.....

jim