[sf-lug] My latest NUC adventure

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 7/18/19 5:03 PM, Akkana Peck wrote:
> Rick Moen writes:
>> Quoting Akkana Peck (akkana at shallowsky.com):
>>> https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/95443/intel-core-i5-7200u-processor-3m-cache-up-to-3-10-ghz.html
>>> are these the only flags I need to look for?
>>>    Intel Virtualization Technology (VT-x)
>>>    Intel Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d)
>>    Boot a Linux live CD, then check the CPU flags line in /proc/cpuinfo.
> I'll be mail ordering. I doubt there's a store in the whole state
> of NM that has these machines in stock, though since I have to be in
> Albuquerque on Saturday I'm going to check some stores there just
> in case (thanks for the reminder to have a live boot USB in my pocket).
>
>>    We're checking for two things:  (1) x86_64 support.  (2) virtualisation
>>    support.
>>
>>    The virtualisation information won't be accurate unless your kernel
>>    revision is at least 2.6.15 for Intel CPUs,or 2.6.16 for AMD ones.
>>
>>    o  Flag "lm" (long mode" proves that the CPU is x86_64-capable.
>>    o  Flag "vmx" on Intel CPUs or "svm" on AMD CPus proves full
>>    virtualisation.
>>
>>    Full hardware support for (Xen, KVM) virtualisation requires that the
>>    CPU support the "VT" instruction extensions on Intel, or the equivalent
>>    "SVM" (aka "AMD-V") extensions on AMD.
> That Intel page shows VT-x and "Intel 64" (I'm fairly confident
> all the processors in the machines I'm considering will be 64-bit
> capable), but I don't see anything that looks like VMX. Is that
> different from VT-x? If so, is there a way to find out without
> having access to a running machine? And do I not care about VT-d?
>
>> One of the reasons I am a bit wary of Dell is that, when you least
>> expect it, they switch a key component to a problematic and usually
> Yeah. Dell used to be especially bad for that, but I thought they'd
> gotten better. I guess not.
>
>> Anyway, there's really no substitute for test-booting the specific unit
>> you hope to buy on a live distro, and running 'lspci', etc., to make
>> sure about the chipsets.
> Wistful sigh ... I wish. I'm especially bothered that I can't
> compare the keyboards beforehand, but that's life if I want to be
> picky about laptops and not just take whatever Best Buy happens to
> be pushing.
>
>> Where that page is 'gone', it's gone because the individual who created
>> and hosted it ceased using that hosting or moved/renamed the page and
>> neither updated the www.linux-on-laptops.com entry nor made sure the old
>> URL had an HTTP 302 referral handler.
> Oh, certainly. I'm not blaming linux-on-laptops.com for the 404s!
> Just noting that nobody seems to be adding links there any more, so
> most links there are ancient and crumbling.
>
>>> In theory I like the idea of buying from vendors that support Linux.
>> Call me a cynic, but I greatly question what 'support' means in this
>> context.   (In IT, the term 'support' has decades of history having
>> vague and doubtful meaning, generally.)
>>
>> Does 'support Linux' merely mean 'made sure there is some driver for all
>> the chipsets'?  If so, that arguably has some tiny amount of value,
>> except that such vendors in the past have often claimed all the hardware
>> 'has Linux support', but upon examination it turns out that some of the
>> chipsets work at all, or work reasonably, only with a proprietary
>> binary-only driver that's normally available only direct from
>> manufacturer download, cannot be lawfully distributed by distros, and
>> is prone to be broken by kernel upgrades.
> Yep, that can happen. On the other hand, I suspect that if I bought
> a laptop from ZaReason, installed Debian and had trouble getting,
> say, the wi-fi driver to work, I could mail Cathy and say hey, I
> bought this laptop from you, now I want to use Debian testing, how
> do I get this dang wi-fi working? and that I'd get a useful answer.
> Which is definitely not the case if I buy from lenovo.com or
> bhphoto.com or (less likely) dell.com.
>
>> For example (speak of the Devil), back around 2000, Dell used to
>> 'support Linux' by offering Red Hat Linux preloads on specific models
> [ ... ]
>> Does 'support Linux' mean helping Linux in any way?  If so, I've never
>> seen any giveback to Linux of any value from such a vendor.
> Remember, the context was buying from small Linux-specific vendors
> like ZaReason or System76. And I do think that at least some of them
> support their Linux laptops. Dell, not so much.
>
>> Last, the hardware from these Linux-specialty hardware OEMs tends not to
>> be best of breed.  I.e., one can do substantially better, and for less
>> money, from non-specialty vendors.
> Yes, I agree there, and that's why I don't buy from those specialty
> vendors even though I like them in theory. I did steer my mom toward
> ZaReason when she was shopping for a Linux netbook, and that worked
> out well, though admittedly it cost a little more than a netbook
> at Fry's would have.
>
>          ...Akkana
>
>
     Have you tried looking at the Office Depot/Office Max advertisements?
<https://officedepot.shoplocal.com/officedepotsd/weeklyad?action=entryflash&SiteID=145&PretailerID=-99860&CityStateZip=&odserver=www.officedepot.com&storeid=2504187#!/promotion?storeid=2504187&languageid=1&pagenumber=1&mode=single>

     There is one inexpensive 11.6 inch device using a Pentium.

*Bobbie Sellers*