Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

LMM-17.1-32bit USB Full Install


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 pcpunk

pcpunk

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 07 September 2015 - 05:49 PM

Hey guys, I wanted to use Mint Mate 17.1 for a while via. full USB Install.  I ran into issues with it being Unusually slow.  I have done this before with Mate 17 and it worked well, even fast considering the USB and pc it is being run on.  I decided to plug my way through with Updates in hopes that it would get better, but the Updates were just as slow and had to bail out on the whole deal due to time constraints.  Really, it was unusable, and, I was using the same exact type of USB that I did before, but perhaps there is a difference that I don't know about.  I tried to find info on testing usb speeds on my linux system but they were all to convoluted.  I will look for windows next.

Here is my gparted pic in case there is anything that would be of interest.  I left a little space at the end as I was of the belief that this would help the drive function better and maybe last longer as it is a type of SSD.

 

2hoh6q1.png


Edited by pcpunk, 07 September 2015 - 05:51 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 paul88ks

paul88ks

  • Members
  • 1,323 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dallas,Texas
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 07 September 2015 - 07:34 PM

I'm not sure about the USB drive- but I can say that I have Haze installed on an external drive and it is slow as well - boot time, and using apps(time it takes to open) so it may be the same issue- i haven't checked ,but I think Mint17.1 is a pretty big OS- but seeing that is is an SSD- I don't know for sure,since I don't have one yet-YET! that's going to be my next upgrade!



#3 NickAu

NickAu

    Bleepin' Fish Doctor


  • Moderator
  • 13,688 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:127.0.0.1 Australia
  • Local time:07:55 AM

Posted 07 September 2015 - 08:15 PM

 

Mint Mate 17.1 for a while via. full USB Install. 
 I ran into issues with it being Unusually slow.

Yes this can be a problem, It all depends on the speed of the USB stick and even the USB port. Eg. USB 3 is faster than 1.



#4 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 07 September 2015 - 09:46 PM

The only variables are:

The OS from 17 to 17.1

I'm using the SAME port, which I believe is 2.0

The Installation was a bit different, but not by much.  I have a lot of old pic's of installs, but not of the one in question - too bad lol. 

 

USB is the same, but not the exact same one.  Both are Lexar 16GB TwistTurn N2610, but there are many numbers on them that are not the same - some are expected - like the Model# with color etc.  All numbers are different except N12610.  Here is an example of the one that worked fine.  Wondering if anyone else has had issues with 17.1 not working like this, Full Install?  At some point I will get a 3.0 Sandisk Extreme.

16GB
Product of China
LJDTT16G-000-115AU
33946-16GGA
4213S
N12610

 

Here is the link to what I have.  I don't think too much of the the Reviews.  I know they are important to read, but some, you don't know what people have done?  And it seems as though most of them are good for this type of usb-2.0  I have not had an issue at all with these, except one time when I pulled out the usb before pc shutdown, or startup, can't remember now. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820191267

 

I was going to try this again with the old - Proven - USB, but it takes so much time.  I think now I will use the one that worked before for a LiLi VirtualBox Emulator LiveUSB Creator install.  Always wanted to experiment with this so that I would not have to change boot order to run Linux Inside of Windows.  Yeah, I know this is bound to be slow but wanted to give it a shot, and thought it would be nice to have if one was traveling and using Public Library's.  Don't know if it will run on a library computer LOL but we will find out, wait maybe that is not a good idea LOL.  I can always use it on my W7 lappy.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#5 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 07 September 2015 - 09:50 PM

Just emailed Lexar with the numbers to see if they could shed some light on what they all mean.  I wonder if they come from different factories and such, although both from China.  This worked well the last time I did it, and was looking forward to using it again.

 

Forgot to mention, I formatted to ext4 Before the Install.  This should not matter right?  I wonder if the first one I did was Fat32?  Hmm, will have to see if those notes are laying around.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#6 Al1000

Al1000

  • Global Moderator
  • 8,030 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:55 PM

Posted 08 September 2015 - 05:33 AM

USB sticks are cheap so I don't imagine the quality control is high. I've found that speeds between different USB 2.0 sticks vary wildly.

If you already have a swap partition on your HDD, then I would get rid of swap on the USB. Any Linux operating system on USB will automatically use the swap partition on the HDD if there is one.
 

Forgot to mention, I formatted to ext4 Before the Install. This should not matter right? I wonder if the first one I did was Fat32? Hmm, will have to see if those notes are laying around.


You wouldn't be able to install Linux to a Fat32 file system.

#7 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 08 September 2015 - 12:49 PM

Good to get your help AL, Agreed on the USB's varying, and probably a lot!

 

Swap, Okay will get rid of.  I wanted to Maybe use it on another old Intel based pc to see if it would work - and show a friend of mine what linux is all about, and thought the swap would be good to have.  His pc is pretty slow with W7, single core Intel CPU and only 2gb of RAM.  Yes I booted a LinuxDVD on his and it ran great, with much less cpu usage, including RAM.  His laptop hits the rev limiter with the CPU to 100% for many seconds, I'd have to check my notes.

 

I checked my history to see if there was any record of the USB install that was successful but if it existed it is now gone.  I will have to try the good one again.

 

Would it be better if I just chose the automatic install, and let the installer do it's thing?  And not have that extra Free Space at the end?  I was reading - that a USB is similar to an SSD, or it is an SSD but not up to the quality of a dedicated external SSD.  So therefore it enjoys having some extra space to extend life. 


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#8 Al1000

Al1000

  • Global Moderator
  • 8,030 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:55 PM

Posted 08 September 2015 - 04:12 PM

It could be that by "extra space" it means within, rather than outwith the partition. Unless you plan on installing much, it probably won't make much difference, but the fuller the partition becomes, the more fragmentation there will be. So while there isn't much in it, and you could also use the free space for something else, the definitive answer to your question is yes it would have been better to have chosen automatic and let the installer do its stuff.

Re the swap partition, yes if you're using the USB on computers that don't have swap partitions then you might want to keep it, but the computer will probably become extremely slow if swap on the USB is used much. That will also wear down the USB

When you're using the USB on a computer that does have a swap partition on its HDD you could always switch swap on the USB off, by running
sudo swapoff /dev/sdXY
swapping X for the letter of the drive and Y for the number of the partition, as the operating system on USB sees them. Then the computer will be forced to use swap on the HDD only.

#9 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 10 September 2015 - 04:36 PM

I see, thanks for clarifying!

 

I triple backed up your swap disable instructions!

 

I re-installed Mate 17 this time to see for myself if there would be any difference, yes...I need to learn the hard way LOL.  I had the same outcome, basically unusable, I could not even log onto bc.com.

 

Next for a full install - I will try a Sandisk Extreme unless any suggest against this.  I was curious about the ones that have Encrpytion, and if that would impede the install, or performance?

 

I read a lot of good things about the sandisk, and a LexarP20 that is even faster but not as good as construction.  My pc would not benefit from a little extra speed anyhow at this level of usb.  I only got 2.0 and the sandisk is 3.0 and quite fast, and best rated, I will go with that.

 

I wondered if anyone has ever tried the LiLi USB Virtual Machine Emulation?  I might attempt this today.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#10 brainout

brainout

  • Members
  • 1,190 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Houston
  • Local time:02:55 PM

Posted 10 September 2015 - 07:22 PM

When I installed to external drive/stick, the formatting was very different, pcpunk.  I let Mint 17 decide the formatting, and it used an LVM.  Same, back for Mint 13.  So the format will affect speed.  The size I used for Mint 13 a year ago, was 32GB stick, Patriot Axle 2.0, and there is no lag after boot.  Very fast.  Boot is slow (1-2 minutes), but that's because there are no special drivers, so Mint looks for drivers each time I plug it in.

 

But Mint 17 and Fedora both run VERY slow in SanDisk Cruzer. Slow but not as slow, with Kingston 2.0 Greek (64GB).  'Normal', in external drives, which I prefer.  Runs VERY fast using Kingston 3.0 Data Traveller.  The hardware responds to the boot immediately with that stick, I don't know why.  Largest size stick is 128GB, which I think was $35 on sale.  Why so low, I don't know.  I bought 3 of them, as the normal price is over $50.  Yikes, they are sold out in that size, right now.  So maybe in 2 weeks they will restock, but no time given.  Think I can even make a portable bootable XP clone from it.  Still experimenting.

 

17.1 Mint runs fast using an external drive, even a slow one, like Seagate GoFlex or Toshiba; at least, I don't notice any lag versus Windows.  You can test how fast, by watching the video I did on Mint 17  using a 60 GB external drive, or was it the 2.0 stick?  I think it was the drive, but am not sure.  The stick would have been Kingston Green (64GB).  Underlying machine was HP 6400 with 4 GB RAM, Xonar sound card, nVidia video card, but the drive was plugged in.  So you can decide if it's slow or not.  I've not tested it with 3.0 WD, which should run a lot faster.  Bear in mind that you don't get 3.0 full speed unless a 3.0 port and a 3.0 drive/stick.

 

Also depends on what port you're using on your computer.  I didn't test to see if Mint can recognize a 3.0 port.


Edited by brainout, 10 September 2015 - 07:42 PM.

(Away, Notifications Off) AUDIT PREMISES, my guidon.  -- brainout or brainouty on vimeo or Youtube, domain brainout.net


#11 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 11 September 2015 - 03:39 PM

@brainout:  I let Mint 17 decide the formatting, and it used an LVM.  This is very interesting to me also, I need to try this.  I did do a LiLi install today and it is unusable also.  I think I will order a better USB today lol.

 

I understand, and I think most of it is the USB - as I read many articles on how slow this USB is even just for simple data transfer.  I think I got a good one a long time ago of the same, and it was usable.  I will try that one again after I make sure it is not the install process I am using.  I think when we let Mint do the formatting is uses ext4, at least for newer distro's.  Just wish I could remember the process I used to do the successful one.  I also tried this once with Cinnamon 17 to a Lexar32gb of the same type LexarTwist and it was unusable also.

 

Yes, the Cruzer is most likely to be slow, it is similar to the lexar I'm using - and designed mostly just for simple data storage.

 

Even if it is a 2.0 Port the 3.0 USB is supposed to be faster - and backwards compatible as per what I have read.  I think I remember cat saying this also: To get a 3.0 whether one is using 2.0 port or not.  You probably already know this.  I am also considering the Kingston, and Patriot.  I think there are some politics involved with all this USB comparison but the Sandisk rates the best for the most part.

 

Thanks for you input, I need all the help I can get, although, this is partly experimentation also.


sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#12 brainout

brainout

  • Members
  • 1,190 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Houston
  • Local time:02:55 PM

Posted 11 September 2015 - 04:44 PM

Okay, pcpunk, here's the rundown:

 

* Yes, 3.0 stick is faster even in a 2.0 port, but still won't be a true 3.0 speed.  The distro has to recognize the port as 3.0 as well, for true 3.0 speed to result.  And if it does, the result is instantaneous.

 

* External drives are faster than sticks, even if 2.0.  Example: I used Seagate GoFlex for Mint 13, and it's just as fast as my internal drive using the same Core 2 Duo (Linux external used on same machine), for Windows.  For my Xeon machine, I use a no-name external 60 GB drive (but I think it might really be WD, Seagate, or Toshiba), Linux version is Mint 17, and it runs just as fast as my internal Windows.

 

* My 2.0 sticks are Kingston Green or SanDisk Cruzer.  These aren't slow on laptops, but so slow on desktops I can't use them.  The Cruzers are twice as slow as the Kingston, and both are rated 2.0, both are 64 GB.

 

* My Patriot red Axle 2.0 for Mint 13 is lightning fast, 32 GB.  I've no idea why.

 

So I'm thinking it depends on the speed of the external drive (you can get really fast one, like WD 3.0 Passport), and clearly also of the type of stick, not merely the rating.

 

I won't use Cruzers anymore because the slider gets stuck.

 

Surely it also matters what's the size of the disk itself, its formatting (again, Mint 17 used LVM), and the size of the swap and home partitions. I use really big swap partitions, as I don't need the Linux drive/stick for data.  I store all data elsewhere.  So that should make it faster.

 

Hope this helps!


Edited by brainout, 11 September 2015 - 04:47 PM.

(Away, Notifications Off) AUDIT PREMISES, my guidon.  -- brainout or brainouty on vimeo or Youtube, domain brainout.net


#13 pcpunk

pcpunk
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 6,229 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:03:55 PM

Posted 11 September 2015 - 08:29 PM

Yes, that's all interesting thank you.  I understood the deal with the 2.0-3.0 thing already.

 

* My 2.0 sticks are Kingston Green or SanDisk Cruzer.  These aren't slow on laptops, but so slow on desktops I can't use them.  The Cruzers are twice as slow as the Kingston, and both are rated 2.0, both are 64 GB.  This is interesting though? Faster on Laptop, these things are crazy lol.  I'm assuming we are still talking LiveLinuxUSB speeds.

 

* My Patriot red Axle 2.0 for Mint 13 is lightning fast, 32 GB.  I've no idea why.  Also interesting! but crazy lol.  I've read the Patriots are fast!  Will you tell me what Mint 13 you are using?  I found Mint 13 xfce to be more efficient than Mate 13 or any of it's brothers, and not use much cpu or RAM at all!  But, not much difference with Mate 17.1 and Xfce 17.1, wacky?

 

In fact, Mint 13 xfce is on an old Acer laptop of mine in my Signature.  I was thinking, that this will also end up on one of these cheap LexarTwist USB's to see if it will work?

 

I just tried LiLi again with Mate 17.1.  I ditched the partitions I made for swap earlier for the Full Install, and did a straight LiLi install with 4090 of Persistence.  It again was unusable but bootable?  I was able to do most tasks but it was so dysfunctional I called it quits.  I took four shots at it and now I am done, it must be the Lexar USB's.  I'd done this before with Unetbootin and one Full Install on the same type of LexarTwistUSB? just plain weird.  I am hardheaded though, so I will pull that old one out and give it a go.  Will also order some real USB's to do this with.

 

It's so sad that these USB's are of lower performance because they have the nicest design.  The whole Twist thing is so good compared to the others on the market that I've seen.  Can't see why they don't lend this design to other higher end USB's they make?????  The usb, as you probably know, has a cover that protects the end quite well, better than any I've seen - considering there is not way for it to fall off!  http://www.lexar.com/flash-drives/lexar-jumpdrive-twistturn-usb-flash-drive?category=207


Edited by pcpunk, 11 September 2015 - 08:32 PM.

sBCcBvM.png

Created by Mike_Walsh

 

KDE, Ruler of all Distro's

eps2.4_m4ster-s1ave.aes_pcpunk_leavemehere

 


#14 brainout

brainout

  • Members
  • 1,190 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Houston
  • Local time:02:55 PM

Posted 11 September 2015 - 11:01 PM

My replies are in brown

 

Yes, that's all interesting thank you.  I understood the deal with the 2.0-3.0 thing already.

 

* My 2.0 sticks are Kingston Green or SanDisk Cruzer.  These aren't slow on laptops, but so slow on desktops I can't use them.  The Cruzers are twice as slow as the Kingston, and both are rated 2.0, both are 64 GB.  This is interesting though? Faster on Laptop, these things are crazy lol.  I'm assuming we are still talking LiveLinuxUSB speeds.  Not LiveLinuxUSB, no.  This is not a LiveUSB install, but a regular install as if to an internal drive, but the target is not internal.  I think it runs faster on a laptop solely because the laptop has more free resources?  Or is better suited to run with flash drives?

 

* My Patriot red Axle 2.0 for Mint 13 is lightning fast, 32 GB.  I've no idea why.  Also interesting! but crazy lol.  I've read the Patriots are fast!  Will you tell me what Mint 13 you are using?  I found Mint 13 xfce to be more efficient than Mate 13 or any of it's brothers, and not use much cpu or RAM at all!  But, not much difference with Mate 17.1 and Xfce 17.1, wacky?  Mint 13 Mate.

 

In fact, Mint 13 xfce is on an old Acer laptop of mine in my Signature.  I was thinking, that this will also end up on one of these cheap LexarTwist USB's to see if it will work?  Could be.  Mint runs like lightning on my Acer netbook A0A 150.  Seems like the bigger the machine, the slower it runs, if a stick.  That could be an incorrect conclusion.

 

I just tried LiLi again with Mate 17.1.  I ditched the partitions I made for swap earlier for the Full Install, and did a straight LiLi install with 4090 of Persistence.  It again was unusable but bootable?  I was able to do most tasks but it was so dysfunctional I called it quits.  I took four shots at it and now I am done, it must be the Lexar USB's.  I'd done this before with Unetbootin and one Full Install on the same type of LexarTwistUSB? just plain weird.  I am hardheaded though, so I will pull that old one out and give it a go.  Will also order some real USB's to do this with.

 

It's so sad that these USB's are of lower performance because they have the nicest design.  The whole Twist thing is so good compared to the others on the market that I've seen.  Can't see why they don't lend this design to other higher end USB's they make?????  The usb, as you probably know, has a cover that protects the end quite well, better than any I've seen - considering there is not way for it to fall off!  http://www.lexar.com/flash-drives/lexar-jumpdrive-twistturn-usb-flash-drive?category=207

 

 

Again, the installs you're doing are not what I do.  I don't do Lili's  at all.  What I do is an actual formal installation.  The steps I go through are exactly the same as you'd go through to do an INTERNAL DRIVE install, except that the target is external.  So when you'd 'Install Mint' to an internal drive, all the steps are the same EXCEPT that the target drive is not internal.  Instead, the target drive is an external drive or stick.

 

Unetbootin, LiveUSB, Lili I would never want to use in my lifetime.  Their persistence is limited to 4 GB, they are slow as molasses, and are totally unnecessary.  Linux is far too genius to need them.  Pity Ubuntu and so many other Linux sites keep on pushing those limited methods.  A plain install as if to internal drive but the target is external is FAR superior.


Edited by brainout, 11 September 2015 - 11:03 PM.

(Away, Notifications Off) AUDIT PREMISES, my guidon.  -- brainout or brainouty on vimeo or Youtube, domain brainout.net


#15 NickAu

NickAu

    Bleepin' Fish Doctor


  • Moderator
  • 13,688 posts
  • ONLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:127.0.0.1 Australia
  • Local time:07:55 AM

Posted 11 September 2015 - 11:11 PM

 

What I do is an actual formal installation.  The steps I go through are exactly the same as you'd go through to do an INTERNAL DRIVE install, except that the target is external.  So when you'd 'Install Mint' to an internal drive, all the steps are the same EXCEPT that the target drive is not internal.  Instead, the target drive is an external drive or stick.

+1

 

That is exactly how I do it and what I mean by " Install to USB as you would to HDD" .


Edited by NickAu, 11 September 2015 - 11:11 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users