Newbies' problems with Ubuntu 7.04
 

First a bit of background:
I had an experience with Linux some 12 years ago, back then no music/video applications were available, so I switched back to Windows.

Many months ago I followed the advice of a colleague of mine and installed Ubuntu 7.04 (the latest at the time). Of course, the installation went wrong (it hanged up). The FAQ and the forum was filled up with answers like be sure to burn your CDs at 8x or less. The solution was only one and posted by someone that had the same problem, the installation routine forgot to set up a swap partition and this issue caused hang up on PC with less memory (but still within the min specs). I also custom installed a bare minimum, thinking that it wouldn't be a problem to upgrade it later. The second mistake.

Now the problems:

Everything went normal, it appeared that it was a bit faster than the original XP Pro. After a while it slowed down so badly that even now when I'm typing it prints one character a second. Even the mouse moves brokenly. Firefox shutdowns from itself when it wants. The CPU runs at 100% during file transfers (!!!!!!), the System monitor itself takes 30-40% CPU (P4/1700 with 1GB RAM), only the network runs ok (speed). When I save a JPG from internet or a PDF or something, the CPU runs to 100% then there are good chances that Firefox would crash. Sometimes it needs 30 seconds or more to activate a mouse click - so a contextual menu R-click-L-click takes me 1 minute of my life.

I couldn't imagin that its file manager is so stupid: it isn't able to detect the free space on a FAT32 external system, either it's too much or it's too low. There are 2 solutions to this: 1. run dosfsck and restart the drive and 2. copy/delete in linux only. It's a nightmare to transfer files between Ubuntu 7.04 and XP.

Now I ran into another nasty problem: the USB one. It does at least one item at a time if not all three:
1. doesn't mount the HDD.
2. locks the computer (luckily the mouse works, it's USB)
3. send the USB-controller of the HDD into Nirvana : I have to power it off in order to use it again.

I've read all the info in the net concerning the USB issue: # modprobe -vr ehci_hcd # modprobe -v ehci_hcd simply doesn't work.

Are any ideas concerning the speeding up my system, the file system or the USB issues?

For now an upgrade is not possible, but when it will be then it would be a downgrade to XP Pro. I'm sick and tired of Ubuntu and if I can't sort it out then I'll revert to M$ even if I'd need to reinstall it every year.

You might have more luck with an up-to-date release, although Ubuntu 9.10 seems to be a bit rough. Try Linux Mint.

No, it won't be another linux of any flavours. The only reason to pick up ubuntu was because of internet, I thought that it would be safer than XP and that colleague of mine prompted me towards Ubuntu as the most user-friendly linux.

So I have to sort out this nasty USB problem, if I can not, I'll wait until my wife ends her office work then switch back to XP. I tried really hard to give linux a chance, it failed miserably ...

I simply cannot understand why an OS at its 7th major revision cannot correctly process the oldest and most known PC file system, FAT, and why it needs 100% CPU time to do a simple file copy.

PS: I am absolutely convinced that it's not a HW-related problem, my PC is an industrial grade PC - everything worked as a charm under XP Pro.

Seriously, try another distro.

Maybe you did something to it. Did you install any software on it, and how? Because Linux really isn't slow. I've never seen or heard anything like that on Linux before.

And what are that computer's specs?

Well brianL is absolutely right on this one...

Try to get version 9.04 (Jaunty) or 8.04 LTS (Long Time Support) (Hardy). Both are still supported and surely will work for you.

Of the two you might choose 8.04 if stability is your priorty and 9.04 if you prefer the newest software that still *works*.

BTW: I use 9.04, 9.10 is too rough for me (Skype is a priority for me and couldn't get that working in 9.10).

Best regards

Stardustdk

I read this and had to register. I'm still using 7.10 and it's as sweet as a nut, it walks over XP for me so I'm sad to hear that someone is getting such terrible issues. Judging by the processor mentioned (P4/1700) this is not new hardware, but my own box is only a P4/2400 with 1g ram and on top of all the floss I run I have Zoneminder, Asterisk, Postfix, Spamassassin all banging away in the background and the box has been up for over 60 days. In fact I only restarted it to add another PCI card for Zoneminder. So either 7.04 was seriously screwy, or you have something seriously up.

Can I ask, if you've come back to trying Ubuntu because it's 'more secure' for the internet - is it because you are currently having issue with XP? It crosses my mind that perhaps if that is the case there is a hardware issue going on affecting both OS's.

Ok, there's a Fujitsu-Siemens having a P4 of 1.7GHz and 1GB RAM. The HDD is extremely small for nowadays standards,15GB, but it runs 24/7. Every other component is integrated in the mainboard.

I did nothing to it, except surfing the inet (mail,google, some fora, photo services like flickr, youtube), my wife also works on office.

Is there any tool, like RegCleaner, that cleans the system? The Sysmanager helps not, if even starts at all when I need it. Yesterday I experienced something that I thought it was history (well Windows95), the user interface stopped working, neither the KB nor the mouse had any effect.

I assume that's the graphic interface that takes so much from the CPU. Or maybe there's something wrong with the swap.

Maybe you guys know from experience some bugs and, voluntarily or involuntarily, circumvent them, you know, pick another way of doing the same thing, like I know in XP compared to my wife (which constantly crashed W95).

However, my previous experience with linux was a positive one, except for configuring the graphic card (it was the main hurdle back then, which I did), and the system ran faster and smoother on lower PC configurations (386/486). Stability, speed and low resource needs were the key advantages of linux vs NT server. Long gone are these days, if now to run a linux you need more resources than even MS wants. I have 2 systems, one has 1GB and runs ubuntu, the other has 256MB (I don't know now for sure, it may be 512) and runs XP home, doing SAT things, including software decoding of MPEG-2. It never started its CPU fan and ran always 5°C cooler.

Now, about 8.04: I was told that I need to do a clean install (format C: :)), which is a no go unless I can however backup some links/favourites and files. I'll give a second chance if I could save my work.

Second question: no, I never had any problems with XP pro, it was a two-fold decision: I have only 1 licence of XP pro so one PC would have MS, the other one then linux. XP becomes slowly an overloaded system and one needs to reinstall it regularly (especially when one installs and deinstalls a lot, more especially various trials and so on). I thought linux would be more safe. Forgot to tell, I'm running both systems without any antivirus but through a HW firewall.

IF you do a dual-boot install next, CCleaner for XP is recommended, nothing of that kind is needed in Ubuntu :).

Before you make a clean 8.04 installation, insert a knoppix CD/DVD while having a external harddrive/USB key inserted (the easy way, I have used it several times). You might even be able to backup your data with the 8.04 CD inserted, give it a try :).

That is only possible if there is nothing wrong with wth the disk. Else try to insert your XP CD and start in command-mode and use the CHKDSK command. From within Linux it is: ntfsfix /dev/sda* (typically).


IF you thereafter install 8.04 remember to use the command: sudo ufw enable. The buildin software-firewall will then be activated.

----

IF Ubuntu 8.04 takes to many ressources, check out Xubuntu 8.04 http://www.xubuntu.org/get
(XFCE desktop).

There might even soon be a Lubuntu 10.04 (LXDE) that can be used on older hardware.

Hopes this helps.

Best regards

Stardustdk

To get an idea of what is killing your system, can you post the output of the command:
Or if that flies by too fast:
This will save the output to a text file called 'topoutput' that you can then paste here.

Just touching on your questions:
I'm not aware of one, or the need for one. There is no registry on Linux - things are far more efficient in my view with simple text configs called as needed.


Any X Desktop is going to use resources, but not to a point where the system is unusable. Gnome is pretty mature and stable and should be the default with 7.04

As for swap, the output of the top command will give this away when you post it. My P4 is currently using a tiny amount at 3080k used.

I agree there are hardware issues, but it's much better than it was. I certainly find getting hardware working with Ubuntu much less of a PITA that I did with XP and Vista. Currently there is a bit of an issue with ATI cards and Ubuntu 9.10 - but then when I think back there were issues with Vista and just about everything :-)

Your small drive is no major issue, but I'm guessing you have windows on it too so I'd be interested to see the output of the 'df' command.

XP With just a hardware firewall is probably not something I would do. This is going to give no protection from the kind of exploits that get downloaded and call }out{ through that firewall - but you don't need me to tell you that.

Let's see the top and df output and see if anything jumps out.

No. Linux does not have a registry or anything of that kind.

If it is used properly Linux does not fill with junk and conflicts like Windows.

1. first, sorry for any missunderstandings, I know that the registry system in linux is hold in etc, RegCleaner was given as a generic term.

2. now, the system runs ok, here's the output of top
Diskfree I run constantly to have an idea of the space left. So here's its output roo:

A dualboot is not an option. It would be either linux or XPPro.

Now, if I'm going to change the system, I don't need something fancy (like Aero for Vista) but something that runs stable in graphic mode (no terminals) and can support a simple and efficace webbrowser, maybe a torrent client (I use ktorrent now).


Additon:
Maybe the sloweness is and the frequently crashing of firefox is due to heavily loaded webpages (like Amazon) with all this ads and popups (javscript, java applets and stuff). It hapens always on pages that are full of such items (most fora are ad supported).

Jumping right out:
5905 bogdan 21 0 687m 141m 11m S 42.1 14.1 14:56.69 java -Xmx512m -Xms6
16762 bogdan 25 0 173m 61m 19m R 32.5 6.2 11:56.50 ktorrent --icon=kto

Top one using 42% cpu, bottom 32%.
I would ask if this is reasonably constant on the box?

From memory - and I'm hoping someone will correct me if I'm wrong - ktorrent is the KDE bit torrent client, but does 7.04 not ship with Gnome? Have you added ktorrent or other KDE parts to to a Gnome desktop at all? I'm not sure what is making use of the JVM (Java) on your box but it's hogging 42% there. I'm not sure you have running in Java, but between that and ktorrent - you are loosing a notable amount of CPU. I suspect if you kill these off you'll notice the system become more responsive. That would be my starting point.

As far as BT goes (which I've always found to slow the box down unless it is set up carefully), I use 'Transmission' which is with Gnome - or on occasions the Opera built in BT client.

Just adding to this - is the Kubuntu 7.04 or Ubuntu 7.04 - there are lots of KDE processes running there I think. Was 7.04 KDE????? I'm sure the vanilla was Gnome (hence the creation of Kubuntu).

What are you running in Java here? KTorrent and X seem to be taking more than I would expect them to, too.

I'm not sure what you mean by "no terminals", but you can try using a plain window manager instead of a desktop like GNOME or KDE.

Options include FVWM, Openbox, Fluxbox, PekWM, etc...

Note that some of these don't even have a taskbar, you can use one like "tint2".

Get "AdBlock Plus". It removes annoying ads and makes pages load much faster since it doesn't have to download each ad at a time from different sites.

Well, I'm a newbie in linux, I installed what I was suggested to install.
The ktorrent was the only client offered at the time of install, or I wasn't aware of anything else. It's awfully slow but it works well when I don't "click" it steadily.

Java VM runs right now a copy of jdownloader. It's a brand new addition, it's not the cause, the system is slow like this for months, I simply cannot change it as my wife still works onto it.

Yes, 43% is normal, often goes up to 100% and stays there. The CPU fan runs like hell, then pauses, starts again, its twin PC (less memory though) is absolutely silent even when decoding MPEG-2 (DVB-S) in software.

By no terminals I wanna say I don't want to type in commands to do things, I keep however a terminal open for df and chkfsk, just in case.

Is it as KDE or a gnome? No idea at all, it starts as a crème (light brown) colour with Nautilus, a taskbar up (like the Windows one) and another one down (with all the open windows and the trashcan). How to find what is what? From what I've seen in google it is a gnome desktop.

Yes, if I work only in office the system is ok. But this is the internet PC so it should do mainly inet jobs. Lauching Firefox would slow the system visibly, luckily there's this "recovery system" so I don't have to type in all the web adresses again when it crashes.

Thank you guys, I really appreciate your efforts. The problems that I have can be solved by having to install a new fresh system then to consider your suggestions, as I cannot update myself anymore (end of cycle).

So, by now, your suggestions would be Xubuntu 8.04 (is it LTS?), Opera as the webbrowser (I thought it is adsupported???), adblock plus, and maybe another torrent client (Transmission???) and RS/MU downloader (I started to like jdownloader). In addition it would be nice to have an office and a multimedia player.

One last question: your forum loads ads from at least 4 sites before loading the posts, would it work if I'd employ such ad-blockers?