it's not related to dosbox
but the second error sounds like that you ran out of memory
do you have a swapfile ?

Qbix wrote:

it's not related to dosbox

Thanks.

the second error sounds like that you ran out of memory
do you have a swapfile ?

Dunno. Dunno how to know. Like I said, absolute newbie. [Well, getting to be less so, but still dunno.]

Regards,

open a console and type free

the last line shows the swap
here is mine

1qbix@laptop:~$ free
2             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
3Mem:       1804180    1013192     790988          0     114912     478112
4-/+ buffers/cache:     420168    1384012
5Swap:      1044216          0    1044216

Qbix wrote:

open a console and type free

That's simple enough. I do have a swap file:

1eric@eric-linux:~$ free
2             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
3Mem:        483468     476548       6920          0       9472     205812
4-/+ buffers/cache:     261264     222204
5Swap:       465844      34328     431516
6eric@eric-linux:~$ 

This raises another question. For the memory I have, is the amount used high? The reason I ask is that in addition to the current problem, my system is running veerrry sloowwwly. [I've been told that the problem may be my graphics processor, which is onboard and I believe has only 32MB of memory.]

Thanks again,[/quote]

Off-topic here, but the interesting line is the one with "-/+ buffers/cache". It's normal under Linux that most memory is used by cached disk data, rather than simply lying fallow. The "-/+" line gives the amount of memory that's really used by processes, which is only a bit more than half in your case, so no worry here.

TeaRex wrote:

The "-/+" line gives the amount of memory that's really used by processes, which is only a bit more than half in your case, so no worry here.

Thanks. That's reassuring, though -- and this is off-topic, too -- I'm still puzzled about the slowness of my system, although yesterday and today it seems noticeably, and equally mysteriously, less slow.

[Less slow, but still slow. Especially noticeable in Thunderbird, where there are literally seconds between a mouse-click and the execution of a command. It's not a bad TB profile. I've done everything related to that possibility, from compacting all my mailboxes to doing a complete reinstall, carrying over only the old mailbox folders, all without any effect. [Not asking for help on this. I'm "living with it" for the time-being -- and wondering whether a new machine would fix the problem.]]

Thanks again,

(probably off-topic)
Are there any process that seems to be taking up too much of CPU/memory at those times of slowing, by using the 'top' command from a console? Sometimes one process or another will start sucking up resources for one reason or another. For example when I change my screen resolution a few times too many, the panel at the bottom of my screen will get stuck at the wrong resolution and start using 95+% of the CPU. Once I kill that process things get better.

An extremely good idea to know what the processes are before you start doing anything. Presuming you have anacron on your system, it could very easily be running some of the system administration tasks that should have been done when the computer was shut off. Some of those can slow the computer a bit down, especially if it's doing something a bit strenuous at the same time.

---------------
About the apt-get, I don't have debian/Ubuntu nor I have I ever used apt-get, but since that tool is intended for system installs, is it possible that Ubuntu is set up so those binaries are available only to root? There are a lot of binaries intended only for system administration so they are placed in /sbin, or /usr/sbin, or some other sbin directory where running as an ordinary user, they are not supposed to be visible.
If so, simply using the command "su" isn't enough. You would need to log in as root.
(A possible concern-in the line-
"bash: aapt-get: command not found" is that aapt-get simply a typo?)
Also, is it possible you don't have apt or apt-get installed?

It seems you added a full Debian sid mirror to your list of repositories, which is bad. sid is the "unstable" branch of Debian, so it will have newer packages than Ubuntu 7.04, but even though Ubuntu is based on Debian they are not compatible. So don't do that again. 😀

I don't know why your console is unable to find apt-get -- unless somehow Adept managed to start an upgrade and left apt in a broken/partially installed state. The MMap error is because you're trying to watch too many packages (everything in Debian repositories + everything in Ubuntu repositories). There are ways to work around it, but in this case you do NOT want the Debian repository in your apt-sources. So, the first step is to remove the repository you added, then see if Adept starts working again.

The GPG error is normal for a repository that you did not import the signing keys for. It just means that dpkg can't ensure the packages are authentic and haven't been tampered with.

You should probably consult the Ubuntu forums as well before doing anything more if removing that repository does not get your package manager running again.

@dougdahl -- apt-get is installed to /usr/bin. Also, Debian/Ubuntu best practice advises to use "sudo", which does search in sbin paths.

apt-setup does not exist normally in Ubuntu 7.04.

To get the latest version of DOSBox packaged for Ubuntu go to http://www.getdeb.net and download the correct version for your OS and architecture.

eric@eric-linux:~$apt-get update
bash: aapt-get: command not found

Watch that error message carefully: It is just a weird typo. You somehow typed "aapt-get" (plus some special keys)

Your apt-get is probably just fine.

dougdahl wrote:

(probably off-topic)
Are there any process that seems to be taking up too much of CPU/memory at those times of slowing, by using the 'top' command from a console?....An extremely good idea to know what the processes are before you start doing anything.

There's an application on the system for checking what processes are running. I forget what it's called. I ran it once. I wasn't planning to do anything. Just wanted to see what I would see. It was all greek to me.

is it possible that Ubuntu is set up so those binaries are available only to root?

There certainly is. I was following instructions that were given by the system. I guess it was assumed I'd know to do sudo. I took them literally and forgot about sudo.

(A possible concern-in the line-

"bash: aapt-get: command not found" is that aapt-get simply a typo?)

It's a typo. I noticed and got a different result, something about some folders beinng "locked," which I'm now guessing was because I hadn't sudoed.

Also, is it possible you don't have apt or apt-get installed?

I guess it's possible, but since the error message came from the system, I assumed it was installed by default.

Thanks,

`Moe` wrote:

eric@eric-linux:~$apt-get update
bash: aapt-get: command not found

Watch that error message carefully: It is just a weird typo. You somehow typed "aapt-get" (plus some special keys)

Yes, I noticed it later, tried the correct command, and got the result I reported in my response to dougdahl

Your apt-get is probably just fine.

Thanks.After taking the steps recommended by snover, it looks like I don't need it. Adept seems to be running fine, now.

Snover wrote:

Thanks. Warning appreciated. I wasn't sure where to get 0.72 for Ubuntu. [Only Gentoo Linux is listed on theDOSbox website.] So […]
Show full quote

It seems you added a full Debian sid mirror to your list of repositories, which is bad. sid is the "unstable" branch of Debian, so it will have newer packages than Ubuntu 7.04, but even though Ubuntu is based on Debian they are not compatible. So don't do that again. 😀

Thanks. Warning appreciated. I wasn't sure where to get 0.72 for Ubuntu. [Only Gentoo Linux is listed on theDOSbox website.] So I thought I'd try Debian. The line for the repository struck me as pretty broad -- there was no reference to DOSbox -- but I figured I could try it and if it didn't work I'd try something else. I'm up for learning, but I guess sometimes trying when you don't know what you're doing can get you in trouble.

I don't know why your console is unable to find apt-get -- unless somehow Adept managed to start an upgrade and left apt in a broken/partially installed state.

My understanding now is that the problem was that I didn't sudo it.

The MMap error is because you're trying to watch too many packages (everything in Debian repositories + everything in Ubuntu repositories). There are ways to work around it, but in this case you do NOT want the Debian repository in your apt-sources. So, the first step is to remove the repository you added, then see if Adept starts working again.

No, I don't want to work around it. I didn't want the entire Debian repository. Especially not the unstable one, just DOSbox. I've removed it from my respositories list.

You should probably consult the Ubuntu forums as well before doing anything more if removing that repository does not get your package manager running again.

I think it's running fine, but if I encounter problems I'll consult with them..

To get the latest version of DOSBox packaged for Ubuntu go to http://www.getdeb.net and download the correct version for your OS and architecture.

I'm stull running Feisty. getdeb says 0.72 for it "is no longer supported" and "will not be updated!" I assumed it would be OK to install it and went ahead with the download. After the download, however, the package manager reported the following.

An older version is available in a software channel. Generally you are recommended to install the version from the software channel, since it is usually better supported.

Since I'm not certain what this is telling me, I didn't go ahead with the install. My take is that there's an older version, probably 0.65, available to me through one of my repositories, but that it's safe to go ahead with the install the getdeb version. [It's for Feisty.] Is that right?

Thanks very much for your help. And I have printed out the posting guidelines. I'll read them and do my best to comply in the future.

Eric Weir wrote:

I'm stull running Feisty. getdeb says 0.72 for it "is no longer supported" and "will not be updated!" I assumed it would be OK to install it and went ahead with the download. After the download, however, the package manager reported the following.

An older version is available in a software channel. Generally you are recommended to install the version from the software channel, since it is usually better supported.

Since I'm not certain what this is telling me, I didn't go ahead with the install. My take is that there's an older version, probably 0.65, available to me through one of my repositories, but that it's safe to go ahead with the install the getdeb version. [It's for Feisty.] Is that right?

Feisty won't receive any more updates to the DOSBox package via getdeb because it [Feisty] has been superceeded by Ubuntu 7.10 Gutsy. This should not be a problem since at some point before the next version of DOSBox you will probably want to update your base system to 7.10. You can safely ignore the message from the package manager about an older version being available directly from a repository and install the package from getdeb.

Snover wrote:

Feisty won't receive any more updates to the DOSBox package via getdeb because it [Feisty] has been superceeded by Ubuntu 7.10 Gutsy.

So there's a way to get an Ubuntu DOSbox source into my repositories?

This should not be a problem since at some point before the next version of DOSBox you will probably want to update your base system to 7.10.

Yep, I have it in mind. After I do some upgrades to my hardware -- or by a new machine.

Thanks again,

Eric Weir wrote:

Yep, I have it in mind. After I do some upgrades to my hardware -- or by a new machine.

Unlike Windows, the system requirements generally don't go up between each new version. 😉 Actually, the next release of KDE requires significantly less resources than the current KDE 3 -- about 40% less memory to run vs. KDE 3, which is pretty cool.

Snover wrote:

Unlike Windows, the system requirements generally don't go up between each new version. 😉 Actually, the next release of KDE requires significantly less resources than the current KDE 3 -- about 40% less memory to run vs. KDE 3, which is pretty cool.

Yeah, I've heard about KDE 4, but when will it be available?

Another off-topic question that's probably better for the Ubuntu forums. I currently have both Ubuntu and Kubuntu installed, but rarely boot Ubuntu. Are there good reasons to have both versions installed? Are there good reasons not to have both installed? [Actually, I guess that's two questions.]

Thanks again,

no there is no need to have both installed.
you can convert them to each other by giving the right the apt-get install command
(the K or without K part is a certain set of packages)

Qbix wrote:

no there is no need to have both installed.
you can convert them to each other by giving the right the apt-get install command(the K or without K part is a certain set of packages)

Thanks.