SUSE / openSUSEThis Forum is for the discussion of Suse Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I find 9.3 to run smoother then 9.2; definately faster out of the box.
I had no problems at all with multimedia support, except for my microphone not working; but I could directly play mp3's etc.
Mind you, I did a custom install, not the standard one, so i installed 3 extra multimedia packages.
Only problem I see, is that 9.3 uses more Ram then 9.2 on my system, but that could be one of my settings. Too lazy to find out, just going to add some ram, 256MB is too few anyways
Originally posted by broch Faster? No. Except that you never optimized 9.2. Speed is exactly the same.
Bad in 9.3:
- dynamic device creations based on the medium name prevents installation of multi cd software (stupid idea)
- even less support for multimedia in the boxed version
- stability unknown yet
the dynamic devive names should be no problem, cause the manually mounting already works fine
I installed UT2003 on my suse with all three cd-roms it demands using "mount /dev/dvd" and "umount /dev/dvd"
If there are more problems, try to use the "export SETUP_CDROM=/mnt/cdrom" string, which should work for other installations, too.
I love that devicename-based mounting, cause my USB-Sticks don't have cryptic names like in 9.2.
The multimedia-support was a little irritating to me - but as I install the update-packages right after system-install, I didn't have much problems, cause I installed the media-packs.
Stability? I'm accustomed not to have stability-problems with standard-software in suse
However: SuSE's version of OO.org 2.0 beta is as stupid as it gets:
it is linked to bug-buddy, if bug-buddy crashes, oo.org crashes too and there is no way of installing oo.org without bug-buddy (pretty crappy software by the way). The only option is to install software from openoffice.org or go back to the ver 1.1.4. There is a lot of other programs with similar bug tracing options, however it is possible to disable it, not with SuSE.
- GRUB editor from YAST is gone (I can edit GRUB of course but YAST GRUB editor is not working) after first time edition
- 64-bit has problems with latest nVidia: either install SDuSE's or get a new kernel from kernel.org (this one still testing)
During installation YAST states that ssh is disabled, this is not true, ssh is running and not configured. Basically this is the biggest flaw: running not configured services, but I think that this is sweet SuSE secret why one needs to run not configured services: ssh, nfs, portmaper, postfix. This is the level of MS stupidity.
From commercial software, I would expect at least 30 days of free support, however SuSE offers only free support for installation problems.
Hi everyone. I'm running with Fedora 3 and Suse 9.3. It was a pain to configure my monitor/video card. Had to use sax2 from command line after days of working with people on 2 forums.
Now that I'm in I really like it, fast, stable, and I finally finished the multimedia configuring tonight. That was a challenge.
Fedora 3 was more simple out of the box with better hardware detection in my experience. But I really like both equally now that they up and running.
I've tried installing 9.3, but I have no idea how. I realise that you need to install via network (if someone knows a way around it that would be nice), but I just don't know how! If someone could give me step by step "newb" instructions, that'd be great.
Originally posted by worldgnat I've tried installing 9.3, but I have no idea how. I realise that you need to install via network (if someone knows a way around it that would be nice), but I just don't know how! If someone could give me step by step "newb" instructions, that'd be great.
-Peter
The only way to install 9.3 legally, is to buy the DVD box set from SuSE.Unless 9.3 is available for FTP install, which i don't think it is yet. However, there are illegal ways to obtain 9.3, but I can't go into them on this board.
If you are a noob, it might be an idea to get the DVD's from SUSE.That way you'll have all the documentation to help you.
ive been using suse since 8.2 and has been the main distro i stuck with since it was the one that lured me away from windows. so far every version i tried had its own advantages and fallbacks when compared to other versions. I always see people on here saying how bloated suse is, which i guess is true in certain respects. Im using 9.2 professional right now with the 2.6.11 kernel and i have to say that suse is just as fast as any when you recompile the kernel and get rid of the uneeded stuff. Im still an inermediate user of linux when it comes to experience and a total n00b with nitty gritty stuff like tweaking the kernel, so ive come to learn to take full advantage of the source rpm's that come with suse, doesnt make much sense to use pre-compiled i386 rpm's when you're using a i686 machine.
Originally posted by broch
- dynamic device creations based on the medium name prevents installation of multi cd software (stupid idea)
OMG what's that?? Does this mean that the automounter mounts each cd into the different folder when you swap CDs? or, even worse, it swaps device names??? AFAIK the last isn't possible, and the idea is plain dumb.
In 9.2 they did it already for USB pen drives. Do they do this also for CDs now? Till now I didn't hear Suse 9.3 would do such things
personally I don't care what you think is possible.
Pop in SuSE 9.3 first DVD then go to /media and you will see a new folder: SU930_001. Eject it and it will dissapear. pop in the second one and you will get SU930_002
Old installers are quite simple: each medium should have exactly the same name. However usaually disks are called disk 1, 2, 3 and so on. if installer is expecting "disk" but the name is taken from the medium then it will never find it. This is plain stupid and prevent installation of multi disk software. It is easy to fix it but I thought that the main idea is to resolve old problems not to create new and stupid.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.