Jump to content

Using ubunto workstations in a server 03/08 environment


Recommended Posts

Posted

as i have time over the 6 week holidays im intending to look into reusing old workstations that wont run xp at a decent speed as ubuntu boxes. The idea being hopefully i can get them to log onto the domain as themselves and use them for things like open office and web surfing (thats the plan for now depending on how it goes i may extend it but we will see) to extend the life of schools pcs where money is an issue.

 

Anybody done this (i presume someone has) and can give me links to good sites on this /advice so i can avoid any silly pitfalls

 

most of my schools now use \\server\users%\year\%username% home dirs rather than \\server\name$ shares which i believe may not help things along though in most cases the latter still exist

Posted

We had a look at this and we didn't really find that Ubuntu ran any better than XP on the old machines we were using. We thought about using Xubuntu but in the end the powers that be decided on new machines anyway.

 

So my advice would be, before you try to join any to the domain or any tricky configuration, just have a go at installing and using Ubuntu on one of them. You may find it's no better and therefore not worth the hassle.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
sounds like a plan cant sue the actual machines as the school(s) will be closed but im sure we have a load of old pcs at the office somewhere to play with
Posted
Same as Batman i'd actually try running them with Ubuntu first, we found that a recent Ubuntu dist doesn't run any faster than XP.

 

That with all daemons, services running as default? Half the majority of daemons/services don't need to be installed, added the fact there are other Window Managers with tiny footprints, Fluxbox, Blackbox, E16, E17 (enlightenment) and various other ones, Sugar for example.

 

Ubuntu base install, what's not needed stripped, all locked down, running a smaller footprint WM will have better performance over XP on most days ;)

Posted
That with all daemons, services running as default? Half the majority of daemons/services don't need to be installed, added the fact there are other Window Managers with tiny footprints, Fluxbox, Blackbox, E16, E17 (enlightenment) and various other ones, Sugar for example.

 

Ubuntu base install, what's not needed stripped, all locked down, running a smaller footprint WM will have better performance over XP on most days ;)

 

You can't polish a turd!!

 

If a machine is too old it's too old... simple as that. Yeah sure, you can switch of unneeded services and that sort of thing but it's not going to mean that your applications suddenly use less resources.

Posted
You can't polish a turd!!

 

If a machine is too old it's too old... simple as that. Yeah sure, you can switch of unneeded services and that sort of thing but it's not going to mean that your applications suddenly use less resources.

 

Are you being pretentious again? Have you run any of the above in development environments, have you actually tried anything, or yet again, just adding your own crap to a post (As I've noticed you've been doing around the site)

 

A stripped OS, Ubuntu Core, E16, E17, Flux and the such use such a small memory print, it will in itself allow applications to tap into more freed memory. Linux is designed to run on anything, at any spec.

 

I've had Ubuntu running on PIII's and 256MB Ram and performing two-fold over Windows XP on the same machine.

 

You need to research more before blurting utter nonsense!

  • Thanks 1
Posted
There does come a point where there is no point nursing old junk in my opinion, i've been nursing a room of Celeron 600s for ages. You can use them for office but even with enough memory quite a few web sites that staff want to use kill the processor. After all the effort stripping down a linux install to get it to run ok it's still a rubbish machine. Reminds me of people driving around in Vauxhall Novas with big shiny exhausts on :D
Posted

How interesting, only today whilst waiting for a Ghost image to finish on our new lot of ICT PCs, I stuck Jaunty Jackalope [ excuse the spelling I have had quite a bit to drink this evening ] on an old ACER Veriton GT [ Pent 4, 1 gig Ram ] - it ran ok.....ish but I was rather surprised how it did struggle a tad on certain aspects. I then ran into a major problem with Firefox NOT playing any BBC Flash video content [ even though it had the plugin's installed etc ] - even youtube video clips it struggled on. The BBC stuff just loaded the screen with the twirly thing in the middle and then stayed like it. God knows what was causing that. [ And that was the latest ver 3.0.11 i think ]

I'll stick Xubuntu on it tomorrow to see if it performs any better.

 

As for old kit, - well I love old kit - turning them into FreeNAS boxes [ FreeBSD ] is something of an obession of mine....The old RM mini towers are excellent work horses for that.

 

Anyone got a cure for a spanish wine and 6 pint hangover 'cos I will certainly have one in the morning...

Posted

Yeh I turned an old RM into a FreeNAS box....then it died :(

 

 

Anyone got a cure for a spanish wine and 6 pint hangover 'cos I will certainly have one in the morning...

 

Sausage sandwitch with brown sauce and not TOO much coffee ;)

Posted
Yeh I turned an old RM into a FreeNAS box....then it died :(

 

 

 

 

Sausage sandwitch with brown sauce and not TOO much coffee ;)

 

Well I managed to get in..... On my third cup of coffee already.....not feeling toooooooooo bad - at the moment. Just started dling Xubuntu for my sins - see how it performs on the old Acer 3600GTs.....

Posted

Xubuntu is great on the old Acer GTs - shame the sound won't work. In fact it won't work on any sound card I stick in it !! Even tried a USB Sound Blaster - sees it fine - no sound though.....

On the same PC, install Ubuntu & the sound works fine !!

Must be a special feature.....of Xubuntu.

The sound on board is a Realtek AC97 if anyone knows anything about it for Xubuntu....

Posted

Most of you most probably know this but I found way of installing XFCE on my current ubuntu build:

 

1. If you've installed the default Gnome version of Ubuntu, just open a terminal by hitting Alt-F2 on your keyboard and typing "gnome-terminal"

2. To enable Kubuntu, type "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop," enter your password when prompted, and answer yes to any questions that pop up.

3. To enable Xubuntu, type "sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop"

4. If you're already using Kubuntu or Xubuntu and want to enable Gnome, type "sudo apt-get install gnome-desktop"

 

The next time you logoff or restart your computer, you can change session types at the logon screen.

 

I much prefer XFCE than Gnome - but thats just me being picky..... :D

Posted

Same can be done with other window managers as well, as they are registered as sessions as well.

 

Fluxbox

Enlightenment

Busybox

Blackbox

Sugar

 

And the other billion Window Managers there seem to be. With most of them, you need to install the WM and any other associated configuration tools like Fluxbox Menu Config and the such (Which will scan the system and compile a menu based on what's installed and configured into categories)

Posted
I'd recommend XFCE for lightweight installs. I used to run it on a Dual CPU P3-450 w/768mb of ram quite happily for several years.
Posted
You can't polish a turd!!

 

If a machine is too old it's too old... simple as that. Yeah sure, you can switch of unneeded services and that sort of thing but it's not going to mean that your applications suddenly use less resources.

 

I believe the mythbusters disproved this theory and a turd can be polished to quite a shine :D

Posted

Oh, here we go again... yes I did see that.

 

Although if you saw it I'm sure you'd agree that it took far more effort than it was worth ;)

Posted
I'd recommend XFCE for lightweight installs. I used to run it on a Dual CPU P3-450 w/768mb of ram quite happily for several years.

 

I'm using XFCE on old RM laptop and it runs really well - the only problem I have is that for some strange reason it won't connect to my FreeNAS box - SAMBA is installed etc etc. When booting into Gnome it works fine !!

I have installed Pyneighborhood too - this sees the NAS box without any problems but refuses to mount via CIFs or SAMBA - very odd. I can connect via a web page - [ smb://freenas/ ] but I want to be able to upload as well as download.....AAggggghhhh.

Will try a few more things but it is rather annoying.

Posted

Oh dear, it seems that once again a nix distribution just shoots itself in the foot. I finally got Xubuntu working seeing network drives etc though SAMBA, even got a shared printer working & photoshop 7 running well in WINE but will it play a simple thing like a DVD ? Errrrrr no. Even I have installed every player, every possible codec and every possible library file known to man they just refuse to play. Even VLC media player refuses to play a simple divX, Xvid, AVI, Mpeg etc etc. It had everything going for it but not anymore.

 

And before anyone asks I also installed libdvdcss

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
right ive got it working and i even know how i did it and have replicated it (granted because i broke my original install managed to make it so sudo wouldn't accept my password). Im now stuck at the same point i am with the mac getting it to map network drives via a script for all users. Mount -t \\server\share seems to sort of work but only show in places\desktop after ive opened them. Ideally i want them in places\desktop\home automatically

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...