Suggestions for openSUSE-11.1 Newbie Installation stickie?

[ken_yap]

I read the HOWTO on burning and I have to say I am sceptical about folk explanations about why burning at a slower speed is more reliable. Note that I'm not saying that burning at a lower speed is not good, just that the "explanations" are dodgy.

One explanation says that you may be able to read the DVD with an OS but the BIOS might still have trouble reading it because the BIOS doesn't "spend enough time" reading it. This is nonsense, or badly phrased. The drive hardware dictates the timing of the low-level reads. The BIOS or OS can only issue the bus commands to the drive. What is more likely is that the BIOS may not reissue the read command as aggressively as an OS might and give up sooner. This is an indication that the read is borderline and you should change the DVD or the drive.

Another explanation talks in terms of "gel" creeping over and filling in the holes. A writeable CD or DVD, unlike a pressed one, is pregrooved. The beam destroys (write-once) or alters (rewritable) the dye to make pits. What gel?

Here are the reasons why lower speed has a better chance:

The drive may not be rated at the high speed in combination with the media used. If you realise that a lot of cheap media are turned out in factories where economy wins over quality, you might have DVDs where the manufacturer ID might be fake and this causes the writer to choose the wrong burn power, which become a more serious problem at high speeds.

The drive might require the latest revision of firmware to work at high speeds. Something like this: Maybe when the drive was first issued, it was rated at 8x for all known DVDs and at 16x for QualityRUS DVDs and other brands were not available yet. As more media brands came out, the drive manufacturer might have updated the firmware to handle those. But you haven't got the latest firmware. BTW this also applies to PVR appliances.

And cheap media are just that, cheap. They are ok for handing your relative copies of programs you recorded off free-to-air TV, but don't expect them to keep data for more than months or a year. I have seen media where it was obvious that exposure to air had caused the dye layer to thin and start developing pinholes.

Having said that, I don't believe it is necessary to go down to 1x. I hardly ever have problems with 4x.

You have to watch k3b. It could pick a high speed when you choose Auto, but this is not compatible with your drive or medium for reasons given above. So set k3b manually to use 4x or less.

BTW if you want to make archival quality DVDs, two words: Taiyo Yuden. The real ones, made in Japan. And good storage conditions of course.

[mingus725]

@ken_yap's clarification should definitely be built into a reworked howto. We see the faulty media problem over and over and over again. My 2 cents is only to add in this excellent link digitalFAQ.com | Blank DVD Media Quality Guide.

[tsu2]

IMO comments about Bittorrent downloading vs HTTP or FTP should be shortened, simplified for clarity.

- For any other download method, the checksum (MD5) check is critical. For Bittorrent, it's unnecessary and overkill because a Torrent download automatically checksums every one of the hundreds or thousands of pieces as well as the final re-constructed file. The only way a torrent download can be damaged is if the original source file is damaged.

- For the first few hours after a Source file is available, downloads will be no faster and might be slower than HTTP or FTP downloads but anywhere from about 5-18 hrs later in general downloads can be far faster.

- All torrent downloads start slow regardless of the ultimate speed, so don't get excited about how slow the download might be for the first half hour to hour, and expect the download to slow the last 15 minutes or so.

- Do be a "Good Citizen" when using Torrent, you don't have to upload as fast as you download but especially on a legal file like this don't be afraid to allow uploads as fast as you are able.

The bottom line is, if you use Torrent to download enormous files like ISOs, you're almost guaranteed to get a perfect file when done, but if your your HTTP or FTP download is corrupted, you'll have to start over... and maybe over... and over again...

[KJ44]

I use k3b to burn a DVD at 4x simply because 4x reduces the amount of mechanical vibration from "loud and annoying" to "barely audible". I've also put a big weight (a ferrite ring) on top of the drive to damp vibrations even more.

My 2 cents is that corrupt DVDs are more likely if the DVD burner is not secure in the PC case, as can happen with mounting rails designed for ease of insertion rather than mechanical solidity.

[KJ44]

My suggestion, in two words:

Be patient.

Firstly, the servers will take a hammering. Secondly, if there are any nasty surprises with the latest release, this forum will soon enough have several threads with the workarounds.

I know this sounds selfish, but it isn't. There are always those who will blaze a trail for the rest of us and do it well because they can sort things out themselves.

If you're a newbie, just give it a few days before upgrading, and there will be solutions on here for your problems. If you rush in, you could be without your machine for a few days.

[BenderBendingRodriguez]

Originally Posted by tsu2

IMO comments about Bittorrent downloading vs HTTP or FTP should be shortened, simplified for clarity.

- For any other download method, the checksum (MD5) check is critical. For Bittorrent, it's unnecessary and overkill because a Torrent download automatically checksums every one of the hundreds or thousands of pieces as well as the final re-constructed file. The only way a torrent download can be damaged is if the original source file is damaged.

- For the first few hours after a Source file is available, downloads will be no faster and might be slower than HTTP or FTP downloads but anywhere from about 5-18 hrs later in general downloads can be far faster.

- All torrent downloads start slow regardless of the ultimate speed, so don't get excited about how slow the download might be for the first half hour to hour, and expect the download to slow the last 15 minutes or so.

- Do be a "Good Citizen" when using Torrent, you don't have to upload as fast as you download but especially on a legal file like this don't be afraid to allow uploads as fast as you are able.

The bottom line is, if you use Torrent to download enormous files like ISOs, you're almost guaranteed to get a perfect file when done, but if your your HTTP or FTP download is corrupted, you'll have to start over... and maybe over... and over again...

Regarding starting over and over if the file downloaded through http or ftp gets corupted. As it may get corrupted You wouldn't have to download it again, just use torrent, allow it to preallocate the file (it must be the same You downloaded through http or ftp) then overwrite that preallocated file with the one that is corrupted and let the torrent finish downloading corrupted bits,

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by tsu2

- For any other download method, the checksum (MD5) check is critical. For Bittorrent, it's unnecessary and overkill because a Torrent download automatically checksums every one of the hundreds or thousands of pieces as well as the final re-constructed file. The only way a torrent download can be damaged is if the original source file is damaged.

I do not believe this to be accurate.

I have downloaded torrent files that were corrupted, but the torrent application gave me a completed message.

Later I realized the file was corrupted, and I then forced (on the bittorrent application) the torrent checksum, and then, and only then, did the torrent application pickup on the fact that the downloaded file was corrupted.

I have seen this behaviour on both ktorrent and azureus. This is not common, but it does happen. I've had this happen about 1/2 dozen times over the course of the past few years.

Hence I believe the md5sum check of the iso file is still useful, even for iso files downloaded by torrent.

[Caracalla]

The newbie guide (or whatever you decide to call it) contains the following sentences.

ATI Graphics Driver Custom Install [Note this link is NOT browsable with a browser - its possible the URL is not populated yet]
ATI - openSUSE

Nvidia Graphics Driver Custom Install [Note this link is NOT browsable with a browser - its possible the URL is not populated yet]
NVIDIA - openSUSE

Perhaps it should be made clear how those links should be used if not in a browser. I suspect you ad them to your repos but am i right?

Originally Posted by colinpendred

I think something I would find useful would be a description of the different approaches to upgrading, with their pros and cons. E.g.
1) Doing a fresh install, but maintaining the /home directory (nice clean install; but you loose many settings)

That, would be very welcome.

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by Caracalla

Perhaps it should be made clear how those links should be used if not in a browser. I suspect you ad them to your repos but am i right?

Yes, and update done.

[oldcpu]

Originally Posted by ken_yap

I read the HOWTO on burning and I have to say I am sceptical about folk explanations about why burning at a slower speed is more reliable. .... snipped .... Here are the reasons why lower speed has a better chance:

ken_yap, thanks for that. I've updated the stickie.

Originally Posted by mingus725

@ken_yap's clarification should definitely be built into a reworked howto. We see the faulty media problem over and over and over again. My 2 cents is only to add in this excellent link digitalFAQ.com | Blank DVD Media Quality Guide.

mingus725 thanks for the link. I have not (yet), but I will add that link.