|
|
|
Re: trouble installing CentOS 5.3 (after failing with Fedora 8) | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
2009/9/14 Bob McClure Jr <bob@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 03:07:37PM -0400, Buz Davis wrote: >> I wasn't sure whether or not to use the old thread about trouble >> installing Fedora 8 or not, but decided to open a new thread. As the >> matters are loosely related let me briefly recapitulate the previous: >> >> ---background--- >> I have a small fixed ip network at home, running red hat 9 on two >> amd k6 500 Mhz boxes. One has 256 M memory and the other 320 M. They >> pretty much meet my needs, but lately I have detected that the internet >> sites >> I frequent are requiring some more modern software than I can run. At >> the time this started I had no way to write a CD, so ordered a set of >> Fedora 8 disks. I picked an older version in recognition of my older, >> limited hardware. It turned out that F8 had a problem with amd >> processors, which was fixed in a respin but the set I had was the >> original release and the respins don't seem to be available. During >> the process of attempting to get the install to work I bought yet >> another old system, but this one running an intel processor and with a >> drive capable of burning CD's. (I had to replace a broken Win XP with >> RH9 to get to it, but it did give me capacity to burn CDs). F8 wouldn't >> install on that box because of hard disk problems. At this point I >> determined to abandon attempts with F8 and ordered a copy of CentOS 5.3, >> the i386 version. >> >> --- end background --- >> >> The problem: >> The CentOS failed also. I could get the first screen up, offering >> choices of how to boot, and if I asked for memtest86 that would start. >> However, any other choice resulted in a reboot (generally during loading >> of vmlinux). Sometimes the disk wouldn't be recognized as bootable. >> I have convinced myself that the disks are OK and that I must need >> either better hardware or more memory (but this is the i386 version of >> CentOS 5.3) or some parameter on the install that I haven't tried >> (and I've tried about all I have found or remember). I would appreciate >> any help. > > Your K6 machines are classified as i586 architecture. They are a > "super Pentium", but not enough to be classed as i686. I know. I > still have one of those in retirement. > > I had the same problem on my antique IBM Thinkpad with a Pentium MMX > 233 (remember those?). It also is classed as i586. Though I couldn't > verify it in the docs or READMEs, I suspect that CentOS works only on > i686 or better. Happily, Fedora 9 loaded just fine on it. Real Soon > Now I need to upgrade it to F10 or F11. > >> Would it be considered bad behavior to also post this on the CentOS >> mailing list ? > > Not at all. Go for it. > >> What I've done so far: >> At first I thought that the disk must be bad (couldn't even run a >> mediacheck) and emailed the vendor. Then it occurred to me that I could >> perhaps download and burn disk 1of6 and use that to get the install >> started. I reaized that the process would be a bit "iffy" on a box with >> hard-disk problems, and also I had never burned a cd, but googled around >> for instructions and plunged in. I downloaded an ios, checked it with >> md5sum and it was OK. I copied it to the "new" computer via NFS and >> checked it again: OK. I burned a CD using cdrecord, and that appeared >> to work. The result behaved much like the original had. I tried two >> more times, varying stuff that I thought might affect the burn, and >> always got the same sort of behavior. Finally I tried mounting each of >> the four disks 1of6 I now had and copied (from /dev/cdrom rather than >> /mnt/cdrom, so as to avoid separating out the files) each to a separate >> directory and compared them. All three that I burned were identical. >> The "store bought" disk was a little larger, but compared OK up to EOF >> (and I recall reading that mass-produced disks might be different in >> their padding). So I am convinced now that there is nothing wrong with >> either the original or recently burned disks 1of6 >> and the problem must either be requiring better/more hardware (but this >> is the i386 version of cent OS) or some parameter on the install I have >> never heard of. > > Cheers, > -- > Bob McClure, Jr. Bobcat Open Systems, Inc. > bob@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.bobcatos.com > After this, Jesus went out and saw a tax collector by the name of Levi > sitting at his tax booth. "Follow me," Jesus said to him, and Levi got > up, left everything and followed him. Luke 5:27-28 (NIV) > > _______________________________________________ > Redhat-install-list mailing list > Redhat-install-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-install-list > To Unsubscribe Go To ABOVE URL or send a message to: > redhat-install-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: unsubscribe > You may want to consider a distro more suited to older hardware of boxes with lower specs. There are a few that come to mind but I'd start with http://distrowatch.com as there's bound to be "something" that's right for you. -- John Maclean 07739 171 531 MSc (DIC) Timezone: GMT _______________________________________________ Redhat-install-list mailing list Redhat-install-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-install-list To Unsubscribe Go To ABOVE URL or send a message to: redhat-install-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: unsubscribe