Tell us about your SuSE install procedure. Smooth? Not??

A6Quattro · 07-09-2005, 09:22 AM

I have 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3 and they all do the same thing!!!! No graphical interface that works with installation. I'm taking a poll about how your install went, I have had so many problems trying to get this to work I'm about ready to quit. I've tried 3 different boxes and they all do the same thing!

After you vote, write a little post about your trials installing any SuSE install. Thanks a lot!

John_Emad · 07-09-2005, 09:44 AM

It just worked very very smoothly

John_Emad · 07-09-2005, 09:46 AM

Would you tell us what are the problems that you faced ??

reddazz · 07-09-2005, 09:49 AM

Mine worked smoothly. Did you install these distros on the same machine? If so try a different machine because the problems you are experiencing could be related to your hardware configuration.

fouldsy · 07-09-2005, 10:09 AM

SuSE has always been one of the smoothest for me. I don't run it personally, but usually stick it on a test machine when new versions are released like i do with a few other distros just so I can see what it's like and the improvements made. Personally, I thought SuSE always had the best hardware detection I'd come across, and one of the best graphical setup tools, sax, I'd come across. Always worked for me, no matter whether it was a laptop screen, crt monitor, tft, etc.

I'm a bit surprised you've had the same problems on 3 version of SuSE and with 3 different boxes. Are they using a similar graphics chipset, if so, what kind? I'd guess there is something common between the different machines you've tried which is why it's leading to such a frustrating experience.

A6Quattro · 07-09-2005, 10:21 AM

I have all WD HD's. NEC DVD-R's, P4 2.6, P4 2.53, AMD Athlon 3200 64bit, MSI K7, MSI K8N, ATI Video cards, Onboard Sound, Samsung Syncmaster monitors (Possible problem???)

FC3 worked on all of them

mhallbiai · 07-09-2005, 10:24 AM

same as John_Emad, reddazz, and fouldsy; installs go smoothly.
i dont use it for much more than testing but a few guys where i work swear by it.

definitely one of the better hw detection Distros and sax is great too.

A6Quattro · 07-09-2005, 11:00 AM

I'd love to get it to work but I don't think it is going to happen. Maybe I'll build a new box...

CouchMaster · 07-09-2005, 11:00 AM

I've installed 9.1 personal and 9.1 pro about 20 times and never had a problem!

I've just got 9.3 and as soon as I get another HD it's going on...

A6Quattro · 07-09-2005, 11:58 AM

I can get farther in text mode. it seems to have a real problem with IRQ#10 on my one system and while in text mode it stalls at: PCI: Probing PCI hardware (bus 00)

There are NO cards plugged into any PCI slots! It works with the video card I know...

abisko00 · 07-09-2005, 01:10 PM

It really depends on hardware and version.

It was a little troublesome to install 9.0 on my Dell Desktop (GX270) and on my Notebook (Presario 900 series), but there was never a problem that could not be solved (BIOS updates, Manual Installation, newer version).

ng0g · 07-09-2005, 01:27 PM

The "install" went very smoothly until I at the very end, after things are really actually already installed and the install program asks you if you want to check for upates. I said "yes" and it brought up YaST and listed a bunch of stuff. I checked it all and the update crashed part way through. Not really crash but stop and give me an error message telling me that it was unable to successfully do the update on some package. I had to finished the install and not do updates. Then after the install do them a few at a time. Choosing more then a few caused it to do the same thing. I have a AMD xp2400+ with 1 gig of fast ddr memory. I have never been able to get the java package to update successfully. Even choosing several different sites did not help.

Guvnor · 07-09-2005, 02:11 PM

The installer itself has been pretty solid for me. Except once when I was installing onto a Windows machine and I told it to use the entire hard drive and delete Windows, it wouldn't do it right, so I had to manually partition.

Also, I've had troubles with Oregon State's ftp server when I installed it on my laptop, and had trouble with ibiblio's server when I installed it on my parent's computer. I've had no problem with the Utah ftp server...

A6Quattro · 07-09-2005, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Guvnor
The installer itself has been pretty solid for me. Except once when I was installing onto a Windows machine and I told it to use the entire hard drive and delete Windows, it wouldn't do it right, so I had to manually partition.

Also, I've had troubles with Oregon State's ftp server when I installed it on my laptop, and had trouble with ibiblio's server when I installed it on my parent's computer. I've had no problem with the Utah ftp server...

I always have problems putting more than one Linux install on a drive. I had 2 HD's in and installed FC3 on hda and Mandriva 2005 on hdc (wich was the second installation on the box) it recognized my FC3 install and asked what bootloader I want to use. well When I was done neither OS worked. FC3 just came up and said GRUB. If I booted to hdc it said there was no OS on it. U know anywhere that has a good manual for partitioning in linux? The rules and such.

HowardL · 07-09-2005, 05:13 PM

The install went smoothly with both 9.2 and 9.3 on two different boxes using the downloaded DVD image file. I had a problem with the 9.3 CD install however: the install couldn't find the software packages. I want to install 9.3 using the CD's on the second box, but will have to delve into the problem a bit more.

All in all it went very smoothly including the Yast updates. No problems worth mentioning. Both boxes are homebuilts and dual booting with XP installed on two different drives and Suse on the third. Very smooth.