Ubuntu: tried downloading ubuntu 15.10 installer crashed computer useless [closed]



Question:

i tried downloading ubuntu 15.10 but the installer crashed while installing packages. Now my laptops boots up with some bugs no internet and installer wont open.


Solution:1

You did not actually ask any question, but I'm assuming that you want to install 15.10 and regain a working installation. I would create a live CD or bootable USB stick using another computer, boot the broken computer from that and install the new Ubuntu. That should fix your problems.

Just follow the instructions here for easy ways to switch to Ubuntu

Edit with details if computer does not automatically boot from CD or stick: Enter Bios (watch out for this message during start up about which F-key to press, maybe F12?) and change the boot order so that CD or USB stick are preferred over your hard drive. Save these changes and reboot. In case your computer cannot boot from a USB stick, try a CD. (This may be the case for old computers)


Solution:2

Hot normally a problem, if you have access to a working pc and a dvd burner. Reburn the ISO inage on an new DVD-R blank, or erase the existing DVD-RW disk anf reburn it. I'v encountered many "hidden" errors in optical disks that can clobber you good, but just redo and try again.

But you may not even have to fo that. Use a lens cleaner and soft cloth or tissue and wipe the shiny underside of the disk clean, leaving no streakmarks, spots, or fingerprints behind. Only handle the disk by its edges like you would carry a small turtle by clenching the edges of its shell with one hand and keeping it level. If it is too wide to hold this way, use the edges around the inner hole. either with an outer edge or spread two fingers in the hole to provide a wedge against dropping. Windex or a bit of mild detergent should work nicely, just get it all off after cleaning and leave no waterdrops on the surface.

Once you boot up the ISO, you can either go to Try or right into Install. If you go to Try, you can mount the partition you were trying to and examine it for hour user accounts and contents. WE are going to save that by not reformatting the partition during the install. If you want to play safe, you can copy the folder /home to a different drive or partition first. Uou probably will have to open a terminal throu Dash (top icon on left side) and type in "te".

You then click on Terminal. With that open you type in seither sudo -i, and after the Enter key, you type in nautilus and another Enter key. Now the File Manager (Nautilus) can do things the normal user can't. you can also access the mounted partitions and drives by doing a cd /m*/*/ command. This puts you where a dir command shows you the partition and drive names for those that are mounted.type in cd , and you are in the base or root point on that drive. It's base to us now because it is not active, but when you install to it and boot up, it becomes the new root.

A dir or ls command here shows you all of its system folders and a few files.

More software can be installed at this point if you have enough RAM, but it is all temporary, and the amount that can be added is restricted to the amount of RAM you have. It all goes away when you reboot. You can write to a device at this point and that will last.

I use to advise people they could use the command rm -r ./[!h]* and wipe out everything except the only folder that begins with "h", that being /home/ where all user accounts and data reside. But you really don't need to and it is safer not to. In fact the whole process of using the Terminal was not necessary, but back then I did not know that. It was part of my learning curve at the time. Maybe you learned something to.

In fact, we did not have to Try the LiveCD at all, but could have gone right to install. But this way, you can use the laptop while the install is taking place, to get on the internet and check your webmail, visit Facebook, or go back to Dash and type something like "ma" to being up the majongg game, or "so" to get and idea of what software you can install after the install is done. Otherwise, the ten or so minutes required for the install just gives you a short slideshow of what you get with your new install.

It comes down to the install method you pick once the Installer begins running. You will be asked questions like if you want it to reformat the whole DRIVE, not just this partition, and it will then install a new logical volume manager scheme if you allow this. That wipes out everything on the drive, which I don't want, but you might. And if you have multiple partitions or want to keep Windows, you don't want this either. You will not be able to repartition the drive later once you are under an LVM either, without starting over from scratch. I prefer to use Ext4 for each partition and set them up with a tool like gparted or use the install process itself to add, delete, or resize partitions when I get to that point. Note that if you elect NOT to reformat, you must user the same same format type and not resize the partition. You only want to change from "Do Not Use This Partition" and designate it as root by selecting /. But you can't do any of that under this choice.

The second choice will divide the drive up between Windows or other installed OSes and create a new partiton just for itself. That means converting existing partitons to new structures and mappings to retain their content, and that takes a real ling time and can have problems.

The ONLY way I will install a LiveCD is to use the last, "Something else" process. This is where YOU make the decisions, not a piece of software. It takes a bit more expertise, but you can get online help. But before this point, you will be asked if the Installer can unmout mounted drives. Say yes. as your intended partition is still mounted. There are circumstances where you should say no id installing from an ISO image of a LiveCD that is on a partition, but that is not the case when it's being done from an actual CD or DVD disk. While in Try, you could right-click on the partition icon and do a unmount and avoid this message, but if you forget, it gets taken care of here.

You reach a point in the process then where you see all the attached drives and all the partitions. Only the first drive may appear on the acreen, but in the upper right portion of the inner window is a small scroll list where you can pick a different drive instead, if you have more than one. Warning though: If you pick a USB drive, make sure you also pick it to be the destination for the grub installation. That is in the little space where you see the .../sda displayed. If you change /sda to point to the USB drive/partition, the boot process will ONLY WORK properly when that USB drive is plugged in. If you screw up and it gets changed, don't worry. Reboot into the install you want to be the normal one by having the USB drive plugged in for the boot to work, and once in the desired install and having your Desktop up, open a Terminal and type these commands to fix the problem:

sudo update-grub; sudo grub-install /dev/sda  

This will switch the primary install choice to that partition. If you have the USB drive still installed, it will bew picked up as a alternative. Unplug it and it won't be. But if leftin, your next bootup when the USB drive is out will cause grub to complain and wait a time for you to decide to insert it by hitting "m" first, or to skip it if you hit "s" instead. That little bit of aggrevation and loss of time never gets better.

But to get the same treatment on the USB drive, you have to have it installed and targeted with the sudo grup install command, but have its /dev/ name replace the sda in the ... /dev/sda command above. Note that you might accidentally pick a partition like /dev/sda1, which it will do, but complain about what isn't there, and you can't normally boot up this way anyway. So best not to.

Ihe installer for Ubuntu will create the /home folder and minimal user account under the name you gave it IF THEY ARE MISSING. But if you already have them there, it will leave them intact WITH ALL YOU USER DATA AND FILES UNDISTURBED. Everything related to the system folders are deleted. You cannot add new folders under /home because that is limited to one or two user accounts. BUT YOU CAN ADD NEW FOLDERS AT THE ROOT OR / LEVEL, and they will survive as well. Ihis is important, because as super user (sudo , sudi -i, or even sudo su root), I have the power to do this, or take other steps as described below : sudo mkdir /hold; sudo cp -rfp /home/ /hold/

This is a complete copy using reiterative, force, and preserve privileges options of all user accounts to the backup /hold folder. Good for later recovery efforts if you mess things up in the future, but you can still get into the partition. Of course /hold could be on a different partition, so this could be a safeguard both ways and you could in effect have cloned installs or even the same user stuff under different installs, a good way to see if you might want to move up or sideways to another Linux distro in the future.

The alternative approach is to use dd (duplicate drive) or rsync. With dd, the older method, the two drives have to have the same exact geometry as to cylenders, tracks, sectors, and all that. rsync is a powerful tool, but has a weakness in that it wants to keep the newest version of any files copied. In other wors, it goal is to syncronize two or more PCs as to certain or all folders and files. You want that ability with cp, you add the -u (update) flaf to the -rfp to make -urfp. The order of these flags is not a problem, so if you want to make a word like -furp or -purf, it still works fine.

The problem with cp is that you find it is weak on wildcards, and has no other include or exclude abilities. The same weakness is shared with dir, ls, and stat. But find, tar, grep, and rsync are among the commands that separate file name/type from path in the initial request and also add in include and exclude directives (find not so much though, as it requires these to be individualized on the command line, possibly led by standalone -o to express OR rather than assumed AND, and possibly preceded by ! or ^ to indicate NOT. An example of find would be:

find \/ a ! b -o c  

Expressions are resolved in a left to right order,and wild cards are allowed. Other operators like -readable -excuatable -type f -purge and [-delete can also be used, and effect results up to that point. -ourge is a misnomer in that it would be better named -avoid or -skip. Because that is whar it does. =purge really means skip certain folders and their content in terms of subolder and files.

And find does not always get it right as to what you are looking for, but it only checks particulars about the folders and files. so is fast and gives you details the others don't check for, It's not absolute about distinguishing whether a file is binary specific or actually one of the many text types, so its results need to be captured to file with >, >>, | tee files(s), or | tee -a files(s) and checked further. In Windows, there are three methods for detecting types: The letters after the last period in the file name are its extension, and/or the first word (2 chars) that make up the start of the file. Those are the primary ways. But under Windows, they added associations in the Registry where certain extensions map to one or more applications. Then the user decides which of these to actually use. That one then takes precidence in the future, becoming the new default for that user.

While some extensions from the DOS days are considered traditional, these were always two alphas, meaning letters, which are 26^2 in number or 676 in all, from AA to ZZ. If you consider lower case as being different, you could have 52^2 or 2,704 types. Seems like a lot, but real plain jane text files can have any two characters present, and even binary files can possibly match up. Further, DOS and Windows treat upper amd lower case letters the same, which limits it to the initial 676 combinations. So you pretty much have to see if the related app (program) recognises it or not, or be on a witch hunt for what program it might fit to, and there are thousands of programs out there.

But even in unknown or misadentified file types, and with the MacOS and Linux that assume no extension association for the most part, something has to show whether a file contains primarily text, usually in Unicode or ASCII, but possibly EBCDIC and other forms. The first decision is whether it is a 16-bit (word) code like Unicode, or whether it is only 8-bits like ASCII or EBCDIC (an old IBM mainframe code). For Unicode, you first check every other byte to see if there is consistency there or not. If so, you then scan the other odd bytes and see if they match a text pattern like ASCII or if Unicode,a different written language as specified by the other 8 bits.

Sounds complicated, but actually it does not take too many tests like this on a file to see if yes, it is a written language of some kind, or no, it is a binary file. It is the ratio of visible symbolic codes when compared to non-visible codes in the possible language under consideration.

But even as a binary file, it may conform to certain known types. Through a process of trial-and-error, you could effect a program that can identify a likely binary type and even a possible doc or spreadsheet type, regardless of presence or absence of an extension, and even recover the text groups that appear in that file and put them in a new text file for further study. In other words, if your partition got really hammered, as long as you can recover parts of the file, you can get most of your text back, simply because text has to follow certain rules.

If you encrypted your files, which is a excellent idea because otherwise you are at risk of malware reading them to get personal data, You probably have a high degree of certainty of their protection. But it can never be 100 percent certainty that you are completely protected. As long as you alone have the encryption key, even the average hacker can't get to your data. But to the above average hacker, you have merely presented him with a challenge. This is because we are talking software here, and there are numeouseways to attack software, and the internet leaves a door open for the attackers to get in. And often if they don't come to you, you can be lured into coming to them. And either you open the files and read them into RAM where they are again plain text, or they master how you do this by observing and recording you doing your thing , then send that info back by the internet. Ehen they are ready, they can hit with you with a hidden process to use your exposed steps and load up other encrypted files and harvest them for information and send that back as well.

You have the encryption key, but not the method of encryption used. You could run into serious problems when attempting to work from a LiveCD to recover encrypted files and folders. A part of the reason is that under the LiveCD, you are always ubuntu. But when you made the encryption methos your default, you were your username. If that is a factor, you may have deep problems which only becoming your username with the same encryption key can resolve. This is all theoretical, as I've not used encryption myself.

This is because the encrypt/decript could be enhanced in some way with information related to that specific install or user. like incorporating the same UUID and hidden password into the key process. This would make the folders and files unreadable if just copied to an alternate drive or uploaded to a pirate's PC via the internet. What's being used, and how it's being used, are simply not known at this point.

Tokeep it from being too restrictive on the user, What you probably have insteads is an encrypt/decript process that just uses the key you come up with and maybe your username. It it included your password as well, then you lose the option to change your passwords on occasion. However, that does not rule out physical characteristics of the PC, such as name, model number, and/or serial number in the creation of a complete enctyption key. That increases security, but really limits where the files and data can reside and be accessible.

It may be futile anyway. Encryption is just software, and anything that is software can be hacked by anyone who is expert at it and puts enough effort at it. And when the same software is used worldwide and is publicly available, even documented to help developers, the task is not so much about unraveling the code, vur is more a question of which libraries, modules, APIs, and programs are handling the encryption/decryption process. And in memory the contents of those files is revealed, so they can just steal it from there if they want.

0And they can even implant their own coded processes to re-encrypt everything with their own key and negotiating a ransom electonicly so you can get your files back by purchasing the key from them. No guarantee they will actually send you a key or that it is the right key. There is no honor among thieves, and another transmission may be their undoing, so you aren't likely to get your files and data back even if you pay.

They go after anybody, as they share their methods with others of like mind, and what eventually entraps them is the money trail. The monwy has to get back to them somehow, but that is a major undertaking in its own right, trying to track down money transfers over the internet, and they attack once and move on, setting up new accounts for the purpose. There are three things you can do for better protection: (1) Back up your user accounts frequently, and keep older backups in case recent ones prove to be no good. (2) Put your backups somewhere else, like on USB drives, other computers, or in cloud storage. Somewhere that if this PC gets hit, you can recover your content from another location. USB drives are particularly good if you only use them for backups and keep them disconnected otherwise. (3) Get off WiFi and Bluetooth and other transmissions. If it's in the air, they can get it. Go wireless and through an ISP, get behind firewalls, and hope that is enough.

Malware protection works, to a point: That point being, it can only protect you from what has been discovered about these attacks, the development of "signatures" (pattern recognition), the propagation of those signatures (often once a week, not every hour or every day), and the time taken bu the user to run the full scans needed to see if ANY of the files on you system had been been infected by the newest viruses detected.

And since no one company's product does all things well or have the same signatures, you get 3 to five of the best, give each an allotted time for full scans, and hope the overlap catches maybe 98% of the KNOWN bugs out there. But there are always new ones showing up. Fortunately, most of the new ones are adaptations of others, and share pretty much the same signatures, so it is maybe a bit better than it sounds.

Me. I got off Windows over a decade ago because it is the biggest PC software target in the world, and people who stick to it don't even know that they have great alternatives in Linux like Ubuntu. In the 7 years I've been on Ubuntu, I've had only five scam emails reach me where someone wanted my personal data. My ISP , Cox.net, trapped the rest. Then Thunderbird warned me the addresses given and URL given were bogus, but did not directly show me the real address. On the other hand, Slimjet, a free and top-knotch web browser, not only warned me again, but showed me the bogus URL link and opened and sent a report for me to people who investigate these matters.

I wasn't going to provide any peraonal data, but I quickly determined that the account was closed, possibly as they had already taken one fish and had quickly moved on. Or maybe the complaints before mine had brought the law quickly on the scene. But the email address was from an email provider in Britian, which shows you how widespread the threat is now.

Your safety is in keeping essential data off your pc or hand-help where intruders can find it. Or use unconventional ways of storing or coding it so that it escapes detection. The better known your methods are, the more likely that information will be taken from you, because the better known and more prevalent approaches will be attacked first. That's one reason Windows had become so vulnerable. There are other reasons related to Windows, but more on that further down.

I also sometines do two installs, one behind the other, for the same user. After the first install, I use Try again and get into the sudo mode and move /home to /keep or /house. So you still have the raw user account mas

de, but not in /home anymore/ I avoid format by using Something else again and make exactly the same account again in the new .home created. and

Different things to try, different ways to manage and attack the problem. The big thing is, Linux allows this by the separateness of /home as it leaves it alone it already there, and the LiveCD gives you real Linux power even on a CD or DVD. Windows is a purely propretary product designed to only work from the PC where originally installed. and while there have been efforts at CD and DVD workarounds, you can't really master Windows because it is prohibited by law. If you do a reinstall, it sets up new accounts under prior names and hides the old accounts and their contents.

An Administrator can work around this, but it is a pain in the neck. And if you do the reinstall just to get control back, you lose all the added patches, fixes, and added software you once had, because the Registry is virginized again. An administrator can back up the Registry against the possibility of future corruption. but that's planning ahead, a task that has to be kept up as new software is added. Or after the Registry is cleaned. Or purged by malware protection software. The Windows' solution was to let the user set a number of saved recovery points, so you can go back to a better time. That helps, but I find it a less than favorable solution. First, it eats up drive space to save what Linux calls a "snapshot". You can do the same thing in Linux, but I never bother. Too many easy workarounds from the command line.

So with Windows, you have days of catching up again, and its almost as bad. If you revert to the initial install from the hidden D: drive, which cannot be done piecemeal so that your settings, added software, and personal files and data are saved. If you somehow keep your personal data intact, you have days of gradually getting Windows patches and bug fixes downloaded and installed, with frequent reboots. Many shutdowns are held up because windows does not implement all the updates until the end, and you are warned not to power off Windows while this is going on. Occasionally they pull these dixes together into an SP. which I think of as a Super Patch. It's a big collection of previous patches so that you just need to be that one, then do a reboot, and you are caught up to that point. There are few if any actual enhancements in terms of new features or capabilities, as these are all reserved for the new release scheduled somewhere in the future. And you will normally have to buy that new release when it comes out. Your release is old news and will soon cease to be supported. Win10 was an exception when it came out, because Win8.x was so vad that many people paid to revert to Win7 instead of waiting. They were so angered that they were not included in the Win8.x replacement that they exxentially forced Microsoft to relent and credit them with a free upgrade to Win10 if they could prove their PCs had initially had Win8.x installed on it. But now I've heard many prefer Win7, which has less in the way of annoyances on it. Miceosoftis out of touch with what people want or need. It is geared to give them what Microsoft thinks it can persuade them to buy, If you wanted a good stable Windows, you could have stopped at Windows 2000, or at worse, WinXP. WinXP was a restampted version of Win 2000 with stiff license verification and validation added so that they could beat down counterfeits coming out of Asia.

Only verified installs could get Windows patches, and they made sure of this by forcing IE to be recognized as an integral part of Windows, then making sure only IE could poll for and get the fixes. They even forced Windows to prove itself as valid, and otherwise display a warning that it was not the real thing on the screen of cloned or pirated copies. Not easy to do when it isn't even real Windows, but they found a way.

Linux is entirely different. I get new releases and patches about twice a week, and it is only when the kernel, or core, is enhanced and recompiled on my own PC is a reboot indicated, and that can be delayed until later. A typical automatic update is over in less than 10 minutes, ans shutdowns are close to immediate. When I reboot, I have full choice as to whether I use the most recent compile or an earlier one. And it is all free, the download, the install, the upgrades, everything. Anything where money is involved is either a request for a small donation or a small fee, of a few dollars when the appearance of 3rd party software choices is asked for by the user. Not the numdreds of dollars needed for upgrading Windows and buying other new software that

So you made the right move to Linux, which is very pointed at meeting user needs, not craven desires.

If Linux gives you any problems, just ask for help as you did. You will find it in spades. Most are short, but having heen in your shoes a few timea, this is the summation of my experience and what you can do to help yourself. If too long or detailed for some minds here, I can place on a cloud and supply a link back. Those interested enough can follow the limk. Those not interested can skip it. I will copy and paste this to a text file in preperation for a shootdown from the Admin here. Quite a few of my threads and post have gotten this treatment in the past.


Note:If u also have question or solution just comment us below or mail us on toontricks1994@gmail.com
Previous
Next Post »