Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Knoppix V7.4.0

  1. #21
    Administrator Site Admin-
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,441
    Quote Originally Posted by otropogo View Post
    Just downloaded 7.4 EN. It passed the md5 test, and the burn was verified. But running knoppix testcd, I ended up with a frozen desktop display with text in background reading:

    flame name "Elektrosmog size 256x1538" etc. The swirly blue image obscured most of the text.
    .....
    I downloaded my copy from TUWien
    I always download from the torrents, have had too many problems from the mirrors (none from the torrents and that way is faster too).

    However, if the MD5 passed then I expect that your download is OK. If not, you can fix it with a torrent client without having to download everything again.

    I strongly suspect that your problem could be that you did not burn at low speed. I don't like that this is important, but it really is. I've proven this time after time. Occasionally a high speed burn will boot, but it is far less reliable than a low speed burn.
    ---
    Verifying of md5 checksum and burning a CD at slow speed are important.

  2. #22
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany/ Dietzenbach
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by otropogo View Post
    Just downloaded 7.4 EN. It passed the md5 test, and the burn was verified. But running knoppix testcd, I ended up with a frozen desktop display with text in background reading
    Again your posting is dubious as all the others in the past.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Kuhman View Post
    I always download from the torrents, have had too many problems from the mirrors (none from the torrents and that way is faster too).

    However, if the MD5 passed then I expect that your download is OK. If not, you can fix it with a torrent client without having to download everything again.

    I strongly suspect that your problem could be that you did not burn at low speed. I don't like that this is important, but it really is. I've proven this time after time. Occasionally a high speed burn will boot, but it is far less reliable than a low speed burn.
    I always download via ftp and have very rarely had a problem with corrupted downloads.

    Your suspicion about the burn speed is unfounded too. I burned three times, once using Pburn 3.5.1 under Puppy variant lupu5.2.8-005 at the "auto" speed setting, and twice using Burniso2CD, which has generally been trouble free for me, unlike Pburn.

    The last two burns were at the lowest speed offered - 4X. The first two burns failed after less than a minute, the last took 12 minutes to finish, then passed the verification test. All were burned from the same iso downloaded from TUW.

    Possibly the difference was in the media. The first two burns were made with DVD+ R disks, while the third was a DVD-RW. Maybe the combination of burner, burner app, and DVD+R just didn't click. I don't burn a lot of DVDs anymore, so I don't have much to base this guess on.

    The successful burn also passed the testcd test I ran from the DVD, but run on my main Desktop, that had no problems with 7.2. Its inability to boot my UEFI laptop may be due to some built in sabotage in the firmware, as it's happened to me before that the optical drive's boot capability was disabled by the system without any input from me. Unfortunately, this setting is difficult for me to find

    In any case, I was able to boot Knoppix 7.4 on my slow, low-RAM 400MHz Compaq, but the demands of the desktop graphics so overwhelmed the system's resources that it took me more than six hours to finally get the usbflash install completed. A huge problem was the Compiz cube, which sat squarely on top of the usbflash installation gui, together with a system that crawled so badly I had to time my keystrokes, as they would be executed minutes after they were made.

    There were program glitches in the installer too - most prominently that it failed to recognize Fat32 formatting, even after I took the flash drive to XP and reformatted it. This caused me to have to run the installer in every possible mode before the last choice - install with an overlay - finally worked.

    The good news is that once I had it on usbflash, my UEFI machine recognized it and it booted, although not without a lockup at first, which forced me to power down (something that has previously spelled death for Knoppix usbflash installs of mine). Synaptic also gave me some problems the first time around. But on the second session, I was able to download and install several essential apps, including clamAV and a signature update (although the detected new gui version of ClamTK continues to evade updating).

    Most importantly, though, I was able to access my 64GB SDXC card via the internal slot, something I couldn't do on this laptop with Knoppix7.2 (I could on an older Toshiba). The next hurdle will be USB3.0 performance, which is a more critical issue, since the internal slot is no speed demon.

    It was also a pleasant surprise to find Darktable available via Synaptic, which now gives me a third app for editing my RAW files, the others being UFRaw and RawStudio.

    I've been desperately waiting for this release because I'm going to have to give up all my old desktops for the UEFI laptop shortly, and I haven't yet found a way to make Puppy Linux run on a UEFI system. So I'm really keeping my fingers crossed that K7.4 will prove reliable.

  4. #24
    My posts are all made in good faith. And it doesn't take a genius to see that I devote a good deal of time and effort to describe my experiences in the greatest possible detail.

    Your comment above, OTOH, contributes absolutely nothing except nasty innuendo. Do you really believe that I fabricate these reports with some malicious intent towards Klaus, Knoppix, or Linux?

    I've invested a great deal of time, effort, and frustration in trying to make Knoppix work for me and for others around me over the past few years. And sadly, it's never really worked reliably for me or anyone else I know. Yet I struggle on optimistically because I believe in Klaus's concept.

    [snip]
    Last edited by Werner P. Schulz; 08-13-2014 at 07:31 AM. Reason: Insult deleted

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    21
    The ONLY time it's necessary (or even advantageous) to burn at the slowest speed possible is when you are using any combination of low quality media (think Memorwrecks and other cheap, no name blanks), cheap burner, or poor burning software. If you use a GOOD burner, and they can be had for $15 quite readily; good blanks like Taiyo Yuden, Falcon, Sony that are made in Japan (Sony's made elsewhere are junk), Verbatum with AZO Dye (their others are junk), and a few others, and good software like XFBurn, K3B, or IMGBurn on Windows then you will be better off burning at the disks rated speed (if the burner supports it) or no more than 1 speed slower. Forcing a 24X burner to burn 16-24X disks at 4-6x is foolish and will result in a LOWER QUALITY burn.

    Honestly, this MYTH about burning at the slowest speed needs to be put to rest.

  6. #26
    Administrator Site Admin-
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,441
    Quote Originally Posted by MrNovi View Post
    The ONLY time it's necessary (or even advantageous) to burn at the slowest speed possible is when you are using any combination of low quality media (think Memorwrecks and other cheap, no name blanks), cheap burner, or poor burning software. If you use a GOOD burner, and they can be had for $15 quite readily; good blanks like Taiyo Yuden, Falcon, Sony that are made in Japan (Sony's made elsewhere are junk), Verbatum with AZO Dye (their others are junk), and a few others, and good software like XFBurn, K3B, or IMGBurn on Windows then you will be better off burning at the disks rated speed (if the burner supports it) or no more than 1 speed slower. Forcing a 24X burner to burn 16-24X disks at 4-6x is foolish and will result in a LOWER QUALITY burn.

    Honestly, this MYTH about burning at the slowest speed needs to be put to rest.
    And you're dead wrong. I've proven it with Sony and Philips media and with many good name brand burners. My theory about what is happening (and I acknowledge that this is only a theory) is that when burning at high speed lots of error do occur. But since the media format wastes about 25% of actual capacity in storing error correcting codes, the errors that do occur can normally be corrected. so the drive and media manufacturers consider them acceptable. Even in normal cases I don't consider these errors acceptable. I want that excess error correcting data that is saved to be used to correct the "bit rot" that occurs over time. If most or all of it it is used to correct errors that I cause by a high speed burn, then it can't be used to correct additional errors when they do eventually occur. But in the case of Knoppix booting, something else seems to be happening. Discs made at high speed and that seem to read O.K. still fail to boot, while low speed burns boot fine. My theory is that during booting Knoppix is not able to apply the extra software error correction to make up for a bad burn. I would have expected that the reader firmware could do this, but as far as I can determine it does not. So until Linux is actually up and running and in full control of drive reading, you better have a good disc image that can be booted without depending on error correction. Burning at low speed generally acheives this, we have seem here over and over that burning at high speed can make coasters when low speed burning will not.
    ---
    Verifying of md5 checksum and burning a CD at slow speed are important.

  7. #27
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Germany/ Dietzenbach
    Posts
    1,124
    Honestly, this MYTH about burning at the slowest speed needs to be put to rest.
    Verifying of md5 checksum and burning a CD at slow speed are important.
    It's a huge difference between slow and slowest.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Kuhman View Post
    And you're dead wrong. I've proven it with Sony and Philips media and with many good name brand burners. My theory about what is happening (and I acknowledge that this is only a theory) is that when burning at high speed lots of error do occur. But since the media format wastes about 25% of actual capacity in storing error correcting codes, the errors that do occur can normally be corrected. so the drive and media manufacturers consider them acceptable. Even in normal cases I don't consider these errors acceptable. I want that excess error correcting data that is saved to be used to correct the "bit rot" that occurs over time. If most or all of it it is used to correct errors that I cause by a high speed burn, then it can't be used to correct additional errors when they do eventually occur. But in the case of Knoppix booting, something else seems to be happening. Discs made at high speed and that seem to read O.K. still fail to boot, while low speed burns boot fine. My theory is that during booting Knoppix is not able to apply the extra software error correction to make up for a bad burn. I would have expected that the reader firmware could do this, but as far as I can determine it does not. So until Linux is actually up and running and in full control of drive reading, you better have a good disc image that can be booted without depending on error correction. Burning at low speed generally acheives this, we have seem here over and over that burning at high speed can make coasters when low speed burning will not.
    And in my opinion you are dead wrong. I and a LOT of other users have proven it. On average I burn 50 or more DVDs and CDs a month and aside from a verified box of defective disks I've only had 2 bad burns in the past 4 years. That includes lots of music cds, dvd movies, operating install and live CDs and DVDs, and general file storage/backup.

    The reason why you are wrong is that the blank disks are designed to be burned at a specific speed and burn best at that speed (plus or minus a very small amount). 16x disks will ALWAYS burn best at 16x and possibly 12x. Anything lower and it will produce MORE errors.

    10 to 15 years ago it was a good idea to burn as slow as possible as there was no burn proof and computers were slow, single core systems where doing anything else tended to mess things up as it would cause the buffer to run out causing major errors/flaws in the burn. Even with Burn Proof, if that buffer ran out it would provide glitches that error correction might not be able to take care of, especially if the buffer was empty for a prolonged period. The buffer would empty when the source couldn't provide data as fast as the burner was attempting to write. This was caused by slow hard drives and/or slow processors (along with low quality blanks and burners).

    Modern multi core systems and hard drives rarely have this sort of problem. As long as you don't empty the buffer you will NOT have a bad burn as long as you are using good quality disks and a good burner. If you are still using a single core system (or a single core P4 with hyperthreading) then the answer isn't to burn slower, but to burn smarter by shutting everything else down during the burn and keeping track of the buffer.

    All burning slower did (does) was to attempt to cover up for system that wasn't able to keep the buffer full enough to get a proper high quality burn. While the burn would be better due to the buffer being full, it would still have more errors and be considerably inferior to what the burn would have been if it had been burned at the blank disks rated speed on a system that was properly configured to feed the buffer adequately.

    What it boils down to is burning slower address the symptom, not the actual problem. If the system can feed the buffer at the disks rated speed then there is absolutely NO benefit to burning slower than the rated speed, or one notch slower. Burning a 16x disk at 4 or 8x is ridiculous and produces an inferior burn unless that is the fastest speed the burner can actually write at such as slim notebook drives. Otherwise deal with the actual issue/problem, not the symptom.

  9. #29
    On the rare occasions I buy blank CDs, I usually go for either Memorex or the cheapest thing I can find in small capacity spindle packs(I never have to buy DVD blanks as my dad records everything he watches on TV to DVD, but he usually goes for the cheapest high-capacity spindle packs he can find at local shops), generally stick to the default setting in whatever software I use, and have gotten a trivial number of coasters in the years since DVD writers became the default of a PC's optical drive. Then again, given how cheap blanks are, unless your consistently getting coasters, I fail to see why one would compalin about getting one(If your getting coasters from bad Blu-Ray burns, that might be worth complaining about as BD-Rs were still ridiculously expensive last time I checked). Still, if your getting an unacceptable number of coasters when the image is good and no one else is having similar problems, I'd say that's a good indication the problem is either with the blanks you are using or the equipment your using for the burn.

  10. #30
    Administrator Site Admin-
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,441
    I'm not going to get into a religious holly war with someone who is so certain of his "information" but doesn't seem to have anything to back it up except positive hopes. I also doubt that most readers here know exactly what dye type is used on their Verbatum disks. If you want to believe that Sony discs made in Japan are great but others are junk, I can show you images of Sony discs made in Japan that, within months of first using them looked like frost on the window on a cold winter morning, (and, of course, lost all of the data written to them) some even looked that way as soon as the single package plastic wrap was removed. This has occurred with multiple batches with different product numbers and different labeling, and to a friend as well as to me, indicating that it is not just the environment that I stored them in. It has never happened to me with other brands, only Sony. ImageShack seems to have lost that image, as well as my old free account, so here's a copy at an alternate location: http://i.imgur.com/m3Ut0zS.jpg

    I suggest that anyone following this discussion don't take either of us on our word, but rather do some experimenting for themselves. You can track down the tool of your choice for detecting soft errors, I use "VSO Inspector". Then make multiple discs from your ISO. I suggest burning at 4x for a DVD and 4x to 8X for a CD. Go ahead and burn another copy at the maximum rated speed of the media and drive. Label them as to burn speeds and then test each for soft errors. For extra credit, keep both discs around and then do the same tests in six months and a year to see how the slow speed burns compare to the high speed burns for bit rot.

    Over the years I've had this discussion many times, either with users who had discs that would not boot at all, or in at least one case I remember the user mentioning how painfully long it was taking to boot Knoppix. Suggestions to burn at low speed are usually resisted, but there are many old posts in these forums where someone has come back and acknowledged that a low speed burn was all that it took to correct their problems.
    ---
    Verifying of md5 checksum and burning a CD at slow speed are important.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •