PCLOS 2010 Live CD won't run on a machine running PCLOS 2008

[T6]

i remember this feature on old knoppix(when existed) but i never heard if pclinux can use that option but it was a fake swap file inside a fat partition to avoid any partition edition on the hard disk

i remember someone saying that if there was a swap available, any linux distro can use it directly without your intervention

i never tested it and since you usually load a livecd, pclinux for example, to create this swap partition, it is something like a endless loop of no sir, i can't do it but i can try.... no sir, i can't do it but i can try...  again 

[gilado]

When upgrading from one release to another (0.93 - 2008 - 2009 - 2010) you do already have a swap partition

[T6]

i was talking when converting a no linux machine to a linux machine

i don't know if a 2009 swap partition will play nice with a 2010 install, probably yes, what doesn't work is ext3 when 2010 uses ext4

[Old-Polack]

i was talking when converting a no linux machine to a linux machine

i don't know if a 2009 swap partition will play nice with a 2010 install, probably yes, what doesn't work is ext3 when 2010 uses ext4

I have 40 partitions that say that is false. 

[T6]

the installation of pclinux 2010 can be done on a ext3 partition? confirm please

[Old-Polack]

the installation of pclinux 2010 can be done on a ext3 partition? confirm please

My first two installations of MiniMe 2010 and the full 2010.1 release were done on ext3 partitions, as i wasn't done testing ext4 at the time. Since then any newer ones have been on ext4. I haven't changed any data partitions from ext3, and everything works fine. You can install to xfs too, if you feel you have the need, or just want to. Reiserfs is still out there too, but I personally won't use it.

[gallup]

I've used ext3 for 2010.7 installation simply so it is usable/readable with other distro's for maintenance purposes. Usually on anothers pc that I maintain. I will  use a very small, won't say whos distro, live cd that is exceptionally fast...and doesn't support ext4 yet. I do this because I'm working offsite and in a hurry and this tiny distro, that runs as root, allows me to boot up and fix things fast and get gone. First time I tried this with new 2010 install it would not recognize any ext4 partitions. I was able to repair with the live cd of pclos, just not as fast to boot as it's a full disto.
Now, my personal home rigs are ext4 and I have no other linux distro's, currently installed here, but Pclos that I use daily.
Before I canned my kde3 version I also had this problem of not reading ext4 as I had both versions on same pc as not all my programs worked quite up to snuff at first, but since 10.1 I quit booting to kde3 at all.

[Old-Polack]

I've used ext3 for 2010.7 installation simply so it is usable/readable with other distro's for maintenance purposes. Usually on anothers pc that I maintain. I will  use a very small, won't say whos distro, live cd that is exceptionally fast...and doesn't support ext4 yet. I do this because I'm working offsite and in a hurry and this tiny distro, that runs as root, allows me to boot up and fix things fast and get gone. First time I tried this with new 2010 install it would not recognize any ext4 partitions. I was able to repair with the live cd of pclos, just not as fast to boot as it's a full disto.
Now, my personal home rigs are ext4 and I have no other linux distro's, currently installed here, but Pclos that I use daily.
Before I canned my kde3 version I also had this problem of not reading ext4 as I had both versions on same pc as not all my programs worked quite up to snuff at first, but since 10.1 I quit booting to kde3 at all.

I still have my KDE3 installations and use them. They all can see/read/write to the ext4 partitions using the 2.6.27.x kernel.

[gallup]

After reading everyone's results here about doing better with more ram I checked my slow system Pentium D @ 2800 MHz with 2Gig ram, radion x300 gpu
and it only had half the ram I though, I corrected it and not better???
Since I have another system I am building I had a nvidia gpu sitting around, and installed it 8600gt, and that was the hold up. Flies like it should now, even with only half the ram. The old radion x300 gpu must be junk, it works but not like a video card should. The onboard intel actually works better than the radion.
Just that it takes more configuration to work. I must say that changing video cards has never been easier, I still recall when I started here that changing video cards meant  no display without tweaking. I even had a desktop with the intel onboard now, just that it was limited to 600x800 but used to not get anything at all without some work

[Crow]

In Linux Nvidia always worked better in my machines.

In Windows Radeon were a better price-performance choice.

[gallup]

I knew this radeon card was basic, but didn't know it was only 64k ram and slow. Dell sold this to the old man that traded it to me for payment for work I did. He didn't realize that the card they sold him was slower than his online video! Sell sell sell.
I was glad to see pclos run good on that machine, couldn't believe it was that slow, glad I subscribed to this thread! I never realized how much is needed for browsers to work right in the way of gpu's. This radeon was actually lagging really bad just using firefox. Now it flies and I'm considering playing with eye candy just to see how it behaves. 

[T6]

64 k?

a x300 can only be 64 mbs, 128 mbs or 256 mbs, a video card capable to run lots of games i know including half life 2(that my old 9200 can run too, older than the x300) can't be slower than a onboard card, about online video, what are you talking about?

about ati and drivers in linux that is another story that has been said so many times...

poor dead horse   

[gallup]

my stupid error, duh, 64MB gpu ram
Perhaps if not drivers just a failing card then, I can't see this one working with any games.
About online video? Being on sat Internet my extent of online video consists of low quality youtube on FF browser.