Jump to content
Robert

Ubuntu Broke This Morning

Recommended Posts

securitybreach

Surely it's not the kernel. How would you release a kernel that buggy? Is this a beta release or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

That is really pitiful. There is no valid reason that a major distribution doesn't bother to do any real testing. As big as Canoical is, there is no reason at all for the developers to not bother testing on multiple hardware configurations. It isn't rocket science..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert

I tried installing Ubuntu 18.04.2 on a blank hard drive again, this time with the network cable unplugged so it would not complicate matters. The first try locked up before completing. The second try installed fine and appeared stable so I installed the nvidia 390 driver and so far it seems to run fine. It is kernel 4.18.0-15 with no others on the screen.

 

This is just a test, but it indicates this might work as a new home if 16.04 eventually gets all messed up.

 

Thanks everyone for your help.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Sounds as though you resolved the issue. Of course, we don't really know what the cause of the original boo-boo was, but that's OK; the goal is a working system. You seem to have that now. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robert

They did it again.

 

I am currently using Ubuntu Mate 18.04.3 LTS and during a routine upgrade it updated to kernel 5.3.0.26 and upon reboot went to a blank screen. Others who are well versed in getting nvidea drivers to work are saying this kernel is not compatible with nvidea.

 

Warning: kernel 5.3.0.26 can ruin your day!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton

Man! This is a widespread issue with many distributions. LQ.org has been fairly burning up with posts regarding this kernel upgrade/Nvidia failure issue. Turns out that Nvidia has been a little slow to update their legacy drivers to be compatible with newer kernels. This is EXACTLY the problem I was having this past week in my Slackware. I'm finding that there are no easy solutions to this because it's in Nvidia's ballpark and they're not hopping to fix anything, it doesn't seem.

 

Those of us with older Nvidia cards (mine GeForce 560) are going to be screwed in a short while due to Nvidia's EOL of legacy drivers. It's all about the $$$. They want us to buy the spiffy new Nvidia cards... that we don't really need. Oh, well... for me, I'll just have to figure out how to get Nouveau to work on my system once the next Slackware version is released. I'll worry about it then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon James
11 hours ago, V.T. Eric Layton said:

Man! This is a widespread issue with many distributions. LQ.org has been fairly burning up with posts regarding this kernel upgrade/Nvidia failure issue. Turns out that Nvidia has been a little slow to update their legacy drivers to be compatible with newer kernels. This is EXACTLY the problem I was having this past week in my Slackware. I'm finding that there are no easy solutions to this because it's in Nvidia's ballpark and they're not hopping to fix anything, it doesn't seem.

 

Those of us with older Nvidia cards (mine GeForce 560) are going to be screwed in a short while due to Nvidia's EOL of legacy drivers. It's all about the $$$. They want us to buy the spiffy new Nvidia cards... that we don't really need. Oh, well... for me, I'll just have to figure out how to get Nouveau to work on my system once the next Slackware version is released. I'll worry about it then.

 

Right on about the bolded part!  If enough folks have to get their wallets out and buy new GPUs, I hope they'll remember the stick 'em up and spend that hard earned money on AMD/ATI GPUs.  If enough folks did that, I'll bet that would adjust nVidias attitude.  I used to think that nVidia was the cadillac of GPUs...any maybe they are(?) for certain user(s) and use cases, but I've learned that other GPUs are absolutely sufficient for my uses.  I got tired of nVidias crap a LONG time ago and specifically look for AMD/ATI GPUs now, although I'm fine with Intel as a fallback.  I'm doing my part...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

I do have a relatively recent (GTX 1060) Nvidia GPU in my Windows Box but that is because my train sims are optimized for Nvidia. I won't upgrade again though as long as I have this system. Anything more powerful will only bottleneck my Sandy Bridge CPU.

I have an Nvidia card in my old dual core desktop that I use as a jukebox in the workroom. But as I said earlier, Nouveau works well enough to give me a display.

I've had trouble with AMD in the past but once you get the FOSS driver working, it is great. AMD on Linux seems to be best with old tech anyway.

Really Intel is the best bet of all, assuming you don't need hard core 3D capability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Personally, I like Nvidia cards. As long as you use the nvidia driver, in my experience, they work flawlessly. That said, I do not use older cards so none of these issues plague me.

 

I just got a Asus ROG GTX 1070 8gb the other week that replaced my aging GTX 970 4gb and I didn't have to reinstall the drivers or anything. I just replaced it and carried on.

 

Unfortunately for a lot of people, most Linux distros nowadays are not designed to be ran on older systems. There are some distros that cater to older machines but most of your popular distros will require up to date hardware.  The key is to not use bleeding edge hardware as the drivers may not be there yet but also do not use too old of hardware or it won't be supported.

 

At one time Linux was great for older hardware but that is really not the case as much nowadays for mainstream distros. Best thing that can be done is to use those that cater to older hardware or use a more lightweight environment. For instance, Gnome requires a minimum of 4GB of ram (at minimum) to run on Ubuntu: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Installation/SystemRequirements

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton
4 hours ago, securitybreach said:

Personally, I like Nvidia cards. As long as you use the nvidia driver, in my experience, they work flawlessly.

 

True... to a point. I prefer Nvidia because it was better supported than AMD/Radeon in Linux. I don't know if that is still the case these days, though.

 

My GTX560 isn't ancient, but it's not top-o-the-line at the moment, so It uses legacy drivers provided by Nvidia. No troubles until this newer kernel (4.4.208) attempted upgrade in Slackware.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ebrke
4 hours ago, securitybreach said:

Unfortunately for a lot of people, most Linux distros nowadays are not designed to be ran on older systems.

I'll be the one, lone voice here for OpenSuSE, which so far has accepted my older hardware without problems. Now that I've said that, I hope it will remain true--I just downloaded the net install for Leap 15.1 and plan to try to install it next week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
V.T. Eric Layton
27 minutes ago, ebrke said:

I just downloaded the net install for Leap 15.1 and plan to try to install it next week.

 

I hope you're not running proprietary Nvidia drivers. ;)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat
7 hours ago, raymac46 said:

Really Intel is the best bet of all, assuming you don't need hard core 3D capability.

 

You may want to reconsider that after reading this:

Intel's Mitigation For CVE-2019-14615 Graphics Vulnerability Obliterates Gen7 iGPU Performance

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00314.html

 

I also have several Nvidia cards GTX970 and GTX560 Ti. The GTX560 Ti has issues with Nvidia driver but is fine with Nouveau. I can't say I prefer them to AMD as I never had AMD, but I never had any reason to change as performance is satisfactory.

All software can be subject to regressions/bugs and all hardware can be subject to design faults. I'm not going to lose any sleep over either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

The only place I'm using Intel graphics right now is in a Thinkpad T430 which has an Ivy Bridge i5. That machine is never used for games or 3D graphics beyond  desktop effects, so I won't lose any sleep over it either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

In my view there has always been about a 10 year window in terms of Linux and hardware age. when I started in 2007 I could get Linux working on a 1997 laptop. Now my oldest machine runs MX Linux and it dates back to 2008.

Right now I wouldn't try Linux on any machine that didn't have a 64 bit processor.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
5 minutes ago, raymac46 said:

In my view there has always been about a 10 year window in terms of Linux and hardware age. when I started in 2007 I could get Linux working on a 1997 laptop. Now my oldest machine runs MX Linux and it dates back to 2008.

Right now I wouldn't try Linux on any machine that didn't have a 64 bit processor.

 

Now that I think about it, you are exactly right about the 10 year window. That seems to be the case. :thumbup:

 

As far as 64-bit processor, most distros stopped offering the 32-bit version. Arch, Ubuntu, Fedora and others stopped offering 32bit back in 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
raymac46

I think that a 10 year window is pretty good actually. That 1997 laptop ran Windows 95 and didn't even have an ethernet port, let alone wifi. Something like that would be a joke today, assuming you could get any O/S to work on it. The 2008 machine is a dual core 64 bit, and I upgraded the video card and added memory up to 6GB.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Agreed :thumbup:

 

Luckily there are some distros geared towards older hardware so you can still get a version of Linux on them if you wish/need to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat

Debian still supports 32 bit, and so do AntiX and MX IIRC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
13 minutes ago, sunrat said:

Debian still supports 32 bit, and so do AntiX and MX IIRC.

 

 

Yeah but aren't they all  based on Debian anyway? So if Debian stopped, they would probably stop as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach

Debian already started back in 2016:

Quote

Debian project has revealed that Debian GNU/Linux operating system is dropping support for older 32-bit CPUs. The users using the older i486 or i586 architectures are advised to move to Debian 8 “Jessie”, which should support the older processors until 2020...

 

https://fossbytes.com/debian-is-dropping-support-for-older-32-bit-hardware-in-debian-9/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sunrat
8 hours ago, securitybreach said:

 

Yeah but aren't they all  based on Debian anyway? So if Debian stopped, they would probably stop as well.

 

Lol, Debian stop? 99% chance I will stop before that happens.

Debian 32 bit is still supported for i686 processors.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
securitybreach
1 minute ago, sunrat said:

 

Lol, Debian stop? 99% chance I will stop before that happens.

Debian 32 bit is still supported for i686 processors.

 

I was referring to 32bit support ending on Debian. I will be very surprised if 32bit support is still around after the next couple of years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...