Ask Your Question

baroquequest's profile - activity

2018-08-15 09:09:19 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2017-01-16 12:02:39 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2017-01-16 12:02:39 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2017-01-11 11:51:48 -0500 received badge  Supporter (source)
2017-01-11 11:51:36 -0500 received badge  Commentator
2017-01-11 11:51:36 -0500 commented answer Name of Sound package in GNOME/Cinnamon

Thanks a lot for that answer. I don't think I would ever have found that on my own.

2017-01-09 12:20:12 -0500 asked a question Name of Sound package in GNOME/Cinnamon

This has to be a "duh!" question, but I cannot figure it out.

I have a system with an Creative sound card. If I install LXDE, I never hear sound. But if I install Cinnamon or GNOME, I don't hear sound until I go to System Settings -> Sound and select the #2 headphones option.

It seems to me that the solution to my problem is to install the GNOME Sound package on LXDE, but I cannot determine which one that is. I looked on a Cinnamon system for all GNOME packages, but none of them seemed appropriate. Any Suggestions?

2016-06-02 08:03:15 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2016-05-07 13:11:41 -0500 asked a question install Intel IPDT from source code

Intel does not supply the usual RPM and/or Debian libraries for IPDT. Intel Downloads only gives two options: download and use an ISO with Fedora 20 and IPDT or download and compile the C++ source code. I'd like to learn more about Fedora, so I wouldn't mind if someone addressed either approach.

1) Is it possible to strip-off the packages from a running Live-USB of Intel's Fedora 20 and copy them to a working Fedora 23 system so I can do a "usr/bin/dnf install ipdt"?

2) I installed GCC. Sure, I can compile all of the code, but how does the created object code translate to packages?

I've done programming in the past, but mostly using languages that aren't used much any more, though I did do some C work. Feel free to point me to some informative webpages.

UPDATE1: To install IPDT on the Fedora 20 Live-USB, the instructions say to execute "install64" in a command prompt. I did so and IPDT was indeed created. I tried to search for "install64" but my memory of the find command is defective because 'find -name "install64"' did not work, so do I need to know the filetype and include that too? Grrr!

2016-03-22 06:57:30 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2016-03-14 12:47:46 -0500 received badge  Famous Question (source)
2016-03-11 12:19:39 -0500 answered a question LiveUSB Creator appears to be broken

I figured it out. I don't think many people know that some, if not all, of SanDisk's USB flash drives were created as local drives, not as removable ones as is usually the case. I have a SanDisk Extreme USB 3.0 drive, but people have commented in SanDisk forums that other drives have the same problem. This fact confuses LiveUSB Creator and other utilities. My solution should have been obvious to me, but sometimes one has to step back and look at things from a different perspective.

I was unable to use LiveUSB Creator, but I was able to create a Live USB by simply installing it from a CD-ROM as one often does for HDD/SDD. There was one gotcha. At first I placed the disc in the drive and the flash drive in a USB port, but the installation stopped at one point. I have no idea why. But then I only placed the disc in the drive and got the installation to the point where it asks if I want to install to a drive and only then inserted the flash drive. Everything works fine now.

P.S. cmurf commented that the official documentation does not mention LiveUSB Creator. This is true and I wish the Fedora community would sort it out. The page that references it is and it looks very similar to official Fedora pages.

And attempting to use openSUSE's ImageWriter with the aforementioned SanDisk drive results in: "Unhandled exception has occurred in your application ... Object reference not set to an instance of an object."

2016-03-09 15:14:44 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2016-03-09 15:14:44 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2016-03-08 19:17:31 -0500 commented question LiveUSB Creator appears to be broken

I downloaded the 64-bit workstation version of 23 from . I share your confusion. Every time I try to build a Live Workstation, I build something that resembles a LiveCD.

2016-03-08 09:09:26 -0500 asked a question LiveUSB Creator appears to be broken

I was logged in as admin on a W-7 64-bit PC and created a LiveUSB stick using LiveUSB Creator. The files on the stick looked okay after it finished and the messages looked like the ones on the FAQ. Then I inserted it into a different PC and booted. I saw the message "vesamenu.c32: not a COM32R image." Okay, I hit Tab and got a menu from which I selected linux0. Fedora booted, but then I saw the screen of "Use Fedora or install on a hard drive." That should not have happened with a LiveUSB. I selected install, but then no drive could be located, not even my USB stick.

Then just for laughs, I formatted the drive on the PC, started LiveUSB Creator, and tried to create a stick using an older iso of Fedora, Fedora-18-x86_64-Live-Desktop.iso, but it could not find the file in Fedora-land -- HTTP Error 404: Not Found.

It appears to me that LiveUSB Creator is broken. Any ideas?

2016-03-06 09:00:36 -0500 commented question Install Opera to be equal with Firefox

Thanks for that link. Yes, I wondered what I was downloading. I started in , but the download process never asked for the flavor of Linux I needed. I suspect most people know their way around and go directly to the source, with newbies like me going down a non-debugged rabbit hole.

2016-03-05 19:48:13 -0500 asked a question Recommendations for LiveUSB Creator USB 3.0 flash drives wanted

SanDisk USB flash drives appear as hard drives, not removable devices. This has been discussed in SanDisk forums, with SanDisk declaring that no new firmware will be released to fix the problem (that person actually advised to buy a new USB flash drive, which I will, but not another SanDisk). LiveUSB Creator cannot handle hard drives, with them not appearing in its GUI. So I will purchase a new USB 3.0 flash drive to run Fedora, but it must be a removable drive. I would like to hear the actual experiences of people here with USB 3.0 flash drives.

2016-03-05 19:39:11 -0500 commented answer Is the downloadable ISO up-to-date?

Yes, but I was driven to that choice. As I said originally, SanDisk USB flash drives appear as hard drives, not removable devices. This has been discussed in SanDisk forums, with SanDisk declaring that no new firmware will be released to fix the problem (that person actually advised to buy a new USB flash drive, which I will, but not SanDisk). LiveUSB Creator cannot handle hard drives, with them not appearing in its GUI. If either SanDisk or LiveUSB Creator would make a simple change to their code, it would work, but I don't see that happening.

2016-03-05 19:33:00 -0500 asked a question Install Opera to be equal with Firefox

I downloaded Opera. Three files appeared, two tars (control and data, I think) and another one. I extracted them but I was not sure where they went, so I extracted them again in place. That created two new directories, one of which was bin. I looked in bin and found an Opera executable which started the browser. Okay, some progress. But then I got stuck. I expected to be see Opera in the list of applications, but no. I really do not want to open downloads/bin every time I want to use Opera. How do I make it equal to Firefox and other applications in terms of accessibility?

2016-03-05 13:20:10 -0500 received badge  Student (source)
2016-03-04 19:33:25 -0500 commented answer Is the downloadable ISO up-to-date?

Thanks for that link. Now I can grab the latest iso and rebuild my stick whenever I'm feeling vulnerable. By the way, I did not see a version for GNOME. There's Cinnamon, KDE, LXDE, Mate, SOAS, Work, and XFCE. Is Work the standard GNOME version? And what is SOAS?

2016-03-04 19:28:02 -0500 commented answer Is the downloadable ISO up-to-date?

Maybe we are talking about two different things, but the way I created a Fedora stick allows for no persistence. I tested this at first by changing the size of text to large. The next time I started Fedora, text was back to the original size. Also, if I try "yum update" or the modern equivalent (DNF), Fedora slaps me and tells me I'm not su (and in a Live User situation, there's no su). This is not all bad, because malware will not be able to hang around if I visit the wrong websites (yes, I know Linux is far more resistant to malware than yukky Windows, but it is still a possibility).

2016-03-04 13:03:09 -0500 asked a question Is the downloadable ISO up-to-date?

I usually use Fedora via a USB flash drive so I can take it from PC to PC. I use Rufus to "burn" it to a USB flash drive, but this does not allow for persistent storage to allow for downloading bug fixes and installing them. And the Live USB Creator has problems with certain USB flash drives, e.g. SanDisk ones which are defined as hard drives, not removable devices. I have a dumb question. Is the downloadable ISO the one from the initial release or is it constantly updated with the latest bug fixes? If the former is true, is the current release available somewhere?

2015-12-19 10:01:40 -0500 received badge  Notable Question (source)
2015-11-26 11:57:58 -0500 received badge  Popular Question (source)
2015-10-08 10:27:07 -0500 commented answer Is Yum deprecated?

Thanks for that succinct answer. It's good news that dnf is syntactically similar to yum. I'll take a look at the help file.

2015-10-07 20:30:51 -0500 asked a question Is Yum deprecated?

With the current 64-bit version, every time I try to update via "yum update" I see a message telling me that Yum has been deprecated, with the command being switched to something else much more difficult to remember. Has Yum really been retired or is my OS hosed? I searched on "yum deprecated" but found nothing.

2015-03-27 14:32:43 -0500 marked best answer New boot options in Fedora 19 (was: Triple-boot the cat)

I just installed 19 on a system with a H67 Intel board, Sandy Bridge CPU, and WDC IDE drive using a IDE/SATA adapter.

It was slightly disconcerting to see the following behavior: after installing 19 on a wiped drive and selecting the option to download updates and reboot, to see the screen turn almost black and stay that way, with no disk activity indicated by the LED on the case. Perhaps this is a bug.

So after some time, I forced a reboot with the case switch. After the BIOS screen, I saw two entries: Fedora and a rescue option. The rescue option is now more obvious than in 18.

Then I installed outstanding updates. After it completed, I rebooted, only to see three lines after the BIOS screen: 19, Fedora of some sort, and the rescue option. So every time updates are installed will we see another boot option of a Windows-esque restore point? If that is the case, I recommend that the text be much more descriptive and readable.

2015-03-27 13:12:19 -0500 marked best answer "Checking for Updates" never completes on Gnome 64-bit

I have installed Fedora 18 Gnome 64-bit before, so I am familiar with the many questions asked. I have installed it on SSDs and SATA hard drives. Today I tried to install it on a WDC PATA drive which has a Vantec model CB-IS100 adapter so it can communicate with SATA controllers. Everything else is the same as I used before, i.e. Intel DH67BL motherboard and i5-2405S CPU. Fedora recognized the hard drive's model number and size. The "Network" dialog shows that I have a Wired connection at 100 Mb/s and Firefox is able to view the Internet. The "Disks" dialog does not show any errors.

However, now that Fedora has been completely installed, it never completes "Checking for Updates" in the "Details" dialog; the button just stays gray. Are PATA drives with SATA adapters verboten in Fedora? Should I try again in one week with Fedora 19 Gnome?