Back to Ubuntu

[ffutures]

OK, so, apparently third time is the charm.

Basically, I tried Fedora and while the graphics worked everything else was horrible - couldn't get the network to work properly, which meant I couldn't access a lot of my files or print. Not exactly what I wanted. Also, the front end doesn't feel as nice as Ubuntu.

So after messing around for a couple of hours went to bed about 5 AM, and out of desperation reinstalled Ubuntu this morning. And lo and behold 3D graphics are working, except that Celestia feels a bit sluggish. There appear to be two versions available, for Gnome and for Glut, so far I've tried the Gnome version, is Glut likely to be faster / better.

Obviously I need to get my act together on this. With SCSI cables the trick was said to be sacrificing the right sort of goat, how do the Linux gods like to be placated?

Comments

[cdybedahl.livejournal.com]

With SCSI cables the trick was said to be sacrificing the right sort of goat, how do the Linux gods like to be placated?

1D8 SAN loss.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Well past that one, mate. More like "Aaargh! it's Cthulhu!" levels of SAN loss.

[cobrabay.livejournal.com]

I haven't tried Celestia on Linux in a couple of years and back then the Glut version ran much faster on Ubuntu 8.04 than the Gnome version, though I had some issues getting it going, and not all the functionality worked. However, that was very much down to it making use of the right drivers, so I'm not sure if the comparison still holds.
Leave a small fish out for the penguin.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

It looks like the GLUT version is faster but doesn't seem to have any controls, which is a bit bizarre. I don't actually need to use it on this PC anyway, it's just one of my personal benchmarks as to how well a PC works.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

As for the fish, I'm mildly allergic. Wonder if that's why it's been so shambolic?