OT Linux downloads

Well I downloaded Ubuntu last night the d/l server was running like treacle so after trying practically every server in the known world (and Wales) I left it running under the tender care of a download manager result I now have 7 copies FFS all I have to do is burn the CD Has anyone used rave on a Linux machine by any chance ? Derek

Reply to
Derek
Loading thread data ...

I believe that the PDF part of RAVE may work OK as there is an Acrobat reader for linux along with several other PDF viewers. The windows executable part won't, but there are tricks and tips to make some work OK. As it is fairly simple, it might work OK, but might need the windows acrobat viewer.

Reply to
Elder

WINE might allow the windows executable to work, personally I've never bothered with it. VMWare Server is free and will allow windows to run in a virtual machine, I use that quite a bit. Any windows programme I need to run gets its own machine so that when it screws up and windows won't co-operate, I only lose one programme, and I can hit "revert to snapshot" to fix it ;-) You can get away with a 2 gig disc image for XP and 128 megs of RAM. Windows 2000 needs even less, 1 gig and 64 megs is usable IIRC.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Sure. The *.exe will not work but you can read the *.pdf files just as easily. What no Windoze Vi$ta upgrade?

Reply to
Jack

Not unless Hades gets the winter olympics, funny I was offered a free copy with ahem -alterations today - I just don't want it . I have just about had enough of microtoss so I am venturing into Linux for a second time after it dawned on me that I don't actually need all the bells and whistles which just slow down an otherwise very quick machine and cost the earth.

Derek prompted by a microtoss mail shot btw

Reply to
Derek

On or around Tue, 6 Feb 2007 22:24:43 -0000, Elder enlightened us thusly:

RAVE has to work with it's own copy of acrobat, I think. It's got some security faffings in it.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

I do wish they'd get installing software sorted out though. Having used Unix some years back (no GUI) I'd rather assumed that the packaging would be all nice and cuddly by now - installing, or trying to, Quasar has been a two-evening nightmare and though whereis says it's finally there I still haven't actually managed to run it yet! I'm sure it's all very interesting the way its done, and there are armfulls of good technical reasons for those of that bent, but for someone who's trying to do other things of an evening it takes far too long and there's too many pitfalls (like changing the package name by converting a "_" to a "-" without mentioning the fact when going from .rpm to .dec , or whatever the latter one was). The Mem just looked at it and said "Why can't you just run Setup?"

- a fair point for Mr []. Average. I'll persevere, out of bloody-mindness to not use MickySoft, but when your used to just dragging an application from a CD or out of an archive, dropping it where you want and just using it, it does rather leave me thinking the Linux won't be taking over the world just yet! There can't be many OS's where installing the OS is easier than installing a single application... :-(

Bring back VMS!!! ;-)

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

If you use ubuntu there is a package manager that is pretty good and installs everything easily and painlessly. you just do 'apt-get install ' (or so) and it does it all for you :) I also hated the way that linux was easy to install the OS and then a PITA for the applications, but now the hardest part of it in ubuntu is finding the name of the application you want to install!

Reply to
Tom Woods

No way! How else can we keep the hoi-polloi out ;-)

Every distribution does it it's own way so there's no one single way that developers can make an installer. This is because there's no operating system called "linux", it's just a kernel and can't do anything by itself. All that makes it useful is the other guff that the distributions supply, and they all supply the same core thing plus a load of different extras with enough differences to mean a universal installer has never taken off.

And long may it remain so :-P

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Not for a .rpm package it seems - you have to go through alien etc as there isn't an Ubuntu package for Quasar. It could well be I missed something, but then that just indicates that that help could do with being a bit more helpful as it guided me on to the wrong tack?

I'll try again tomorrow night.... Pool tonight. If I can find my bat....

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

I've always rather suspected that was the case ;-)

I appreciate that, but it does rather spoil the "Linux will save the world" zealots argument!

When I've figured it all out I'll doubtless agree! It's very easy to forget that one was a learner once (witness the way learner drivers get treated).

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

or you get hold of synaptic package manager and it does it all through a gui

Si

Reply to
GrnOval

I can never find the stuff i want in synaptic so i type it in instead!

Reply to
Tom Woods

Package managers are fine if all you want is the standard popular stuff, installing an accounting package called Quasar is another matter, it's not in ubuntu's package list apparently so it's install-it-yourself time.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

It's not just me then - phew!

Richard

Reply to
beamendsltd

No, it wasn't even in Gentoo's package list, and gentoo has some weird stuff in there..

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

-snip-

RAVE works fine under WINE.

Also you don't have to burn a CD you can mount the iso locally & run it from there.

Neil

Reply to
Neil Wilson

That is, you can mount the rave iso once Linux is running.

Neil

Reply to
Neil Wilson

thanks for that Wine it is, goes without saying , I have the RAVE CD data installed to the tertiary partition as I can never lay hands on the disk when I need it basically very lazy that way. I suppose its time to start relearning Linux command line syntax last time I kept getting DOS 3.3 flash-backs kept me awake ,very nasty. Derek

Reply to
Derek

In message , Derek writes

Ahh DOS 3.3! :-) Has anyone tried running win 3.1 on a modern machine? It flies!!! Sorry, I obviously meant to say it runs much slower than Vista which is microsnot's fastest ever OS ...

Reply to
AJG

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.